Now That's What I Call an Unfair Comparison

In the article Now That’s What I Call Democracy, in The Guardian the author argues that campaigning in Great Britain is closer to the ideals set by Rousseau than the campaigns in America. British campaigns are cozier, reaching into small towns, and candidates are less concerned about image.

While the article is interesting for what it reveals of a different culture, comparing the U.S. and Great Britain is like comparing apples and oranges. Great Britain is 244,820 square kilometers and has a population of about 60 million people. On the other hand, the U.S. has a landmass of 3,794,083 square kilometers and almost 300 million residents.

What works in reaching a smaller, more manageable sum, isn’t effective when dealing with the scale of the U.S. as a whole. American candidates do reach out to small towns in Vermont and Iowa before when the primaries make it worth the effort to reach out to what would otherwise be small impact areas. Once the primary is won, candidates have less incentive to visit small towns in non-battleground states.

I'm unaware of the extent to which the British use new media in campaigning, but it's pretty obvious that Internet and mobile technologies become more of a must-have when reaching out to 300 million people.