techPresident - Obama's Organization, and the Future of American Politics - Comments

After the election

Rasmus Kleis Nielsen — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 18:52:40 -0400

Fascinating post, I really appreciate the historical perspective.

I wonder what will happen if the movement feels that Obama lets them down. If he becomes President, and probably even just in the course of the general election, at least some of the larger clusters that have been drawn into the game are bound to be disappointed by one or more policy positions.

When it happens, will people be able to use the same infrastructure that assembled them to pressure him? Or will they just leave? Can the movement arraign itself to allow for processes or consultation and/or accountability that will give people the sense that even if they disagree with his stance or one thing or another, they at least had a fair chance to be heard, and should stay to fight, also on the internal fronts, another day? Would the campaign even want that?

It seems to me that a recurring tendency in somewhat decentralized and largely self-organized movements is that they are very inclusive, and may work pretty well, as long as everyone remains on more or less the same page in terms of the short-term and purely instrumental goals. But one thing is for a lot of people to come together because they agree that the country needs a Democratic President. Another is to maintain cohesion and the power it generates once things gets more complicated than that.

Interesting thought!

Joe212 — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:52:22 -0400

Interesting thought!

If he wins the election, and wants to successfully implement the changes promised, we'd need the support from his current organization/group to ensure Democratic Party majority controlled in both senate and congress. As such, I think his existing organization should be managed by the DNC. By the end of the day, it is all about "money" and "quit pro quo". In order for him to be able to advance his programs, he needs support both from those guys in Senate and Congress, who in turn also need his support to raise money for their reelection campaign.

One of the reasons of the party insiders/superdelegates have been exciting of supporting Obama is the ability of Obama and his campaign organization to raise money from small donors. (Why in the hell they want to support the other candidate whose campaign was in such huge debt?).

In any event, if this movement is sustainable, it will change the dynamic in American politics.

Campaigning vs. Governing

Luigi Montanez — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:01:53 -0400

It'll be interesting to see what will happen when this movement seeking to capture power actually attains that power. Didn't work out so well for the Conservative Movement these past few years.

Campaigns are competitions at their core. Americans like that. There are contests that we can follow, votes we can tally, dollars we can count. Governance, on the other hand, has no points system. Yes, Obama can keep revamp WhiteHouse.gov to be more transparent. He can continue to utilize his massive list with calls to action. But will his followers really respond the way they do now?

American government, from the federal level down to the local school board, is not a very attractive thing. But campaigns are great fun. They have clear winners, there's a clear goal, and there's a lot of drama. Governance is about the infinite shades of grey, and the outcomes are never clear, often frustrating, and always complicated. Who wants to get involved in that?

The only way I can see the Obama movement continuing is if a clear issue-based organizing infrastructure is set up. That way, supporters can pick and choose where they want to expend their energy. Those who want to see solutions to global warming can engage in one space, those interested in universal healthcare over here, etc. It may even make sense to organize around concrete initiatives within the larger issues. Whatever the solution, it needs to remain accessible to the masses while recognizing that attention is a scarce resource.

He'll probably keep BarackObama.com up

Patrick Ruffini — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 23:13:05 -0400

There's not a lot of precedent here, but past practice has been turn your list over to the RNC/DNC once you win.

I suspect Obama will keep his list independent of the DNC, and organize independently from there. As we've seen, the person is a lot more powerful a platform than the party.

very funny!

Freedomfighter — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:46:21 -0400

"it suggests that the era of Big Money and Big Media pre-selecting the nominee of the Democratic party may well be over" .........yeah right, ROFLMAO!

Here are some factors to consider:

1) the anti-Clinton movement gave Obama a huge advantage. Progressives did not like her, moderates hated her husband and young people found her unappealing. This made it easy for Obama to appeal to many types of voters.

2) white guilt which did not, and still does not want to criticize Obama, because it fears being seen as racist.

3) Young people under 26 who read more books of Harry Potter than history. Obama looks like a high school debate guy, and the young are drawn to him and react as if they are voting for American Idol or prom king instead of president. Doubts? How far would a white Republican candidate get if his middle name was "Hitler"?

4) George Bush sucks at speaking. Face it. The last ten presidents before Bush spoke a thousand times better. But just remember, a good speech does not mean a good president.

5) Obama raised lots of money from groups like Moveon. To say big money did not play a part is disingenuous.

Obama's Organization, and the Future of American Politics

Micah L. Sifry — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 22:12:12 -0400

Barack Obama's victory over Hillary Clinton is the first time an insurgent has beaten the establishment candidate in the Democratic primaries since Jimmy Carter in 1976. This is interesting and important for all kinds of reasons. One, as I've written before, is that it suggests that the era of Big Money and Big Media pre-selecting the nominee of the Democratic party may well be over, in no small part because of the affordances brought by the internet: lower costs of communication and collaboration, and less allowances for hypocrisy and dishonesty in campaigns.

But there's another big reason why Obama's victory is so important. He is riding herd on the largest and most potent new political organization anyone has seen on the American landscape in at least sixteen years. He's probably got anywhere from four to eight million email addresses on top of his 1.5 million donors and 800,000 registered users of my.barackobama.com, his social networking site.

What happens with this organization if Obama wins? What will he do with it? And what will it do with him? For a website that is focused on how the candidates are using the web, and the web is using them, by the time November rolls around, this could be the billion-dollar question.

This isn't the first time this question has arisen in modern American politics, by the way. And usually the answer is "Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss." It's just that the internet should force us to think about the possibilities of a different answer. Not only that, I think Obama is thinking about a different answer.