The internet makes it much easier for conservatives in Fox News, talk radio, and political campaigns to get informed quickly and cheaply. It is just in its infancy, and it's already having a tremendous affect. You might not notice that disgruntled journalists who are getting shut out by the editors have been leaking to Drudge. Editors are no longer able to spike big news like they did in the past.
Until there's substantive change in the political system, then in all likelihood senators and other politicians are going to keep getting elected the way they always do: by spending large quantities of pork on their districts.
You think pork is bad now. What would it be like if we go back to appointments? State governments would love pork even more than the voters.
Sorry to be the one to have to break the news to you, but here it is: Most people don't care. I'm sure it makes consevatives feel better about themselves when they can annoy journalists, but from spending time in the real world among average people, I can tell you for certain that it's not making an ounce of difference in the way people think about politics - or even causing them to think about politics at all. They're going to keep voting the way they're voting, simple as that.
And if it does start to make a difference sometime in the future, then it will be enough that they'll still have the power to elect representatives, because representatives can stop any unconstitutional legislation or spending right in its tracks regardless of who's in the Senate, or the White House, for that matter. The HR is still the most important branch of government.
You think pork is bad now. What would it be like if we go back to appointments? State governments would love pork even more than the voters.
History doesn't seem to support you on that one. Governments may like money, but they also like sovereignty. People, on the other hand, can be bought much more easily.
But they sure as heck would NOT love unfunded mandates!