<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Did the Internet win it for Obama?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2008/11/08/did-the-internet-win-it-for-obama/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure: /2008/11/08/did-the-internet-win-it-for-obama/</link>
	<description>Technology news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:21:48 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: DavidB</title>
		<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/11/08/did-the-internet-win-it-for-obama/comment-page-1/#comment-144797</link>
		<dc:creator>DavidB</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Nov 2008 14:34:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.blorge.com/?p=8556#comment-144797</guid>
		<description>Right, &quot;for better or worse&quot;. 

So Dave, do you consider yourself one of these &quot;unbiased bloggers&quot;? I mean, you reference wildly liberal sources and link to a fairly libertarian site&#039;s analysis, so if you only evaluate those sorts of sources you get a possibly very different answer to your question than if you took an unbiased look at the entire political spectrum. 

But this is a tech blog, so why you&#039;re writing about politics I don&#039;t get. There&#039;s plenty of politcal blog sites you could post on, do they not pay as well as Blorge?

So, why DID Obama win? Or alternately, why DID Mac lose? Mac&#039;s campaign throughout did NOTHING to energize or enthuse the base that would need to turn out in order for him to win, while Obama did exactly that. He energized the liberal base to beat Clinton, then remarkably held them in the the general as he went more moderate. Mac was unable to do that. 

And of course, Obama probably outspent Mac 10:1, which regardless of the internet is what ultimately bought him the presidency.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right, &#8220;for better or worse&#8221;. </p>
<p>So Dave, do you consider yourself one of these &#8220;unbiased bloggers&#8221;? I mean, you reference wildly liberal sources and link to a fairly libertarian site&#8217;s analysis, so if you only evaluate those sorts of sources you get a possibly very different answer to your question than if you took an unbiased look at the entire political spectrum. </p>
<p>But this is a tech blog, so why you&#8217;re writing about politics I don&#8217;t get. There&#8217;s plenty of politcal blog sites you could post on, do they not pay as well as Blorge?</p>
<p>So, why DID Obama win? Or alternately, why DID Mac lose? Mac&#8217;s campaign throughout did NOTHING to energize or enthuse the base that would need to turn out in order for him to win, while Obama did exactly that. He energized the liberal base to beat Clinton, then remarkably held them in the the general as he went more moderate. Mac was unable to do that. </p>
<p>And of course, Obama probably outspent Mac 10:1, which regardless of the internet is what ultimately bought him the presidency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
