Check out Perspctv:

An exploration of internet activity in reference to mainstream media. Gain a unique Perspctv on the US Presidential Elections.

This project presents different perspectives in our world, including that of Mainstream media and user-generated content on the Internet. Explore the similarities and the disparities, hear the many voices that have emerged and choose which view, if any, makes the most sense to you. What we think vs. what they say we think -- All the chatter on the Internet, all the traditional news media coverage, and all the pollsters -- Perspctv brings it all together in a simple and elegant manner -- and gives a unique "dashboard" picture of the elections at any one given moment in time, totally un-biased.

Not only is turnout at record levels in primaries across the country, but the role the internet is playing in the election is setting records that bury previous high marks. According to the Pew Internet & American Life report issued today, a full "46% of Americans have used the internet to get political news and share their thoughts about the campaign. Online video and social networking sites have taken off, especially among Obama supporters." So let’s stop asking whether the internet will ever elect a president and accept the fact that no candidate can afford to downplay the importance of it.

On Wednesday (June 11), I joined a panel of eCampaign Directors for major presidential campaigns at a forum called, what else, the first 21st Century Campaign, sponsored by Google and National Journal. Peter Dauo for Senator Clinton, Mark Soohoo for Senator McCain, Joe Rospars for Senator Obama, and me, former Director of eStrategy for Governor Romney’s presidential campaign, rounded out the panel.

We discussed topics such as what it’s like to run Internet strategy for a major presidential campaign, the changing role of traditional media, what factors into a candidate’s success on the Internet, and whether the guerrilla tactics employed during the campaign will carry over to the White House for the candidate who is elected.

The Obama campaign has launched a microsite at FightTheSmears.com, debunking the attacks du jour against him (and his wife). But why exactly did the campaign feel compelled to do this, and why won’t we be seeing a similar site from the McCain campaign? A quick visit to Snopes.com may offer an explanation.

In her non-concession speech, Hillary asks for input - but is it just to stall? Or a fundraising ploy? And did Peter Daou warn her about what Chris "Google Bomb" Bowers can do with an open invite like that?

PLUS: Did Hillary have her event 50 feeut underground to duck Obama's cellphone call???

A two-minute video clip of a peeved Clinton supporter at this week's DNC rules meeting has been viewed on YouTube more than 700,000 times; the credentialing of state bloggers for the upcoming Democratic convention continues to draw fire; a blogger looks for political lessons in the teachings of futurist Ray Kurzweil; and digital activists on the right react to McCain's less than stellar online presence.

There seems to be no limit to the power of the people to use the internet to express themselves politically, artistically, ... you name it. Continuing in my emerging pattern of video show-n-tell, check out Hillary's Downfall. You can watch the video and vote on whether you find it offensive on this Democratic Underground post. I thought it was offensive, but I was laughing too hard to cast my vote.

(NOTE: I had reservations linking directly to this video, so I have posted to an item that allows people to vote on whether it is offensive, as an extra filter. As I indicated in my opening sentence, this video shows that there is no limit to how citizens can use the internet to make political statements.)

Obama makes YouTube history with the most watched presidential campaign video ever -- and beats cable news along the way.

Hillary Clinton is under fire for planted questions again, but this time her critics are wrong.

It's a web politics battle: Disintermediation v. Interactivity...

So I realized, I'm over 30, don't use Facebook or Twitter much, and I'm a Hillary supporter. I wasn't quite ready for Clinton's "Town Hall" on the Hallmark channel (I'll save that one for the over 60 crowd) but I feel as if the coolest applications of new technology this campaign cycle are aimed at the young and uber-wired, whereas 2004's innovations painted a wider stroke: blogs, online ads, MoveOn.org and email. I'm so glad these tools are driving out the youth vote, but I'm wondering what the new social media has to offer that is essential to the rest of the electorate?