One of the things we haven't talked about much around here is the explosion of YouTube as a tool for and driver of campaigns.
Here's the upshot: YouTube and sites like it are allowing people unaffiliated with campaigns to make campaign videos and event reports, and, most importantly, to share them. Some of them are scarily good. For example, go watch this anti-Lieberman piece. Doesn't matter if you agree with it or not--it's effective. And it's going to spread all around the liberal web: by the end of today, I bet half a million people will have seen it--if not more.
Ned Lamont's campaign didn't pay a thing for it. They had nothing to do with it--just like they have nothing to do with the hundreds of liberal blogs posting positive coverage of the race. For now, these videos probably serve the same purpose as campaign blogs--they excite and motivate the candidate's base. But what if they start reaching undecided voters? Video is a far more powerful medium than text.
Another new wrinkle. Another small campaign revolution, courtesy of the Web.
Update: This piece from CT Bob is a perfect illustration of the possibilities of this medium. As Bob's video suggests, most incumbent politicians don't really like being questioned by regular people. They'd rather deal with the press, which acts as a sort of buffer between elected officials and the rest of us. The mainstream press is predictable, and follows set patterns and rules. Regular people are not, and do not. I think it annoys the hell out of some officials to have to speak directly to us without the buffer there, and to have to answer our questions because suddenly we've got digital cameras and an internet connection. Everyone can be the media. Scary stuff.