Using Technology to Thwart the GOP

One of today's Quick Hits was a piece by Ari Melber in The Nation examining Obama's tech-savvy campaign and its operation. I thought Melber did a great job of penetrating behind the scenes to clarify how the toys and gadgets help Obama put together a one-of-a-kind grassroots organization. But Melber also succeeded at looking into the future and explaining why Obama's technological operation is so crucial to presidential politics.

We know McCain's thinking on technology from an article published in the San Francisco Chronicle this summer:

GOP presidential candidate John McCain, fundraising in the San Francisco Bay Area, one of the nation's technology capitals, acknowledged Monday that he isn't a "tech freak" or entirely comfortable with the Internet, BlackBerrys or e-mail. But he strongly disputed criticism that he is "out of the loop" as unfair.

As former head of the U.S. Senate Commerce committee, McCain said, he has been a driving force to oversee legislation that helped the Internet flourish - even as he is still learning to get comfortable with it himself.

"Am I a tech freak? No," he said in an interview Monday with The Chronicle. "And I don't like to text message because I'd rather call somebody on the telephone."

"I do understand the importance of the computer. I understand the importance of the blogs," he said.

McCain said he is well aware that technology "does drive the news. It is changing the shape of the news. ... It's changing the information age, and I've got to stay up with it."

He added, "But I am forcing myself ... let me put it this way, I am using the computer more and more every day."

Melber's closing reminds us why having a candidate who understands technology is so important to this nation:

If his strategy succeeds, all presidential politics could change. First-time voters--both this generation of the young, black or marginalized as well as future rookie cohorts--might become a constituency that candidates pursue. The long shot, if Obama wins big, is a larger electoral universe that forces Republicans to play catch-up. The party that spent decades stifling voter turnout, from illegal suppression to court-sanctioned ploys like ID requirements, could find electoral salvation depends on the ability to register its own new voters. Couple that grassroots pressure with an economic crisis stoking intense bipartisan populism, and a "new politics" might really be on the horizon.

The vision is obvious, and frankly, kind of Rovian: strike at the heart of your opponent's strengths and force them to run on something else. I love the fact that Melber pointed out the Republicans' strategy of squashing participation, because I think that it really gets to the heart of why technological development is such a Democratic issue. With technology boosting political participation and engagement all across America, we suddenly are toeing a new political landscape, one the Republicans have worked against for years. By refusing to adapt and be -- gasp! -- progressive, the GOP created an opening for someone to supply the enthusiasm, dedication, and the message to create a self-sustaining system that is immune to most "wedge" tactics, in which society is turned against itself for partisan advantage. Obama has put this vision forward, and it's paying dividends, registering unbelievable numbers of new voters this year and flooding the campaign coffers with cash. As a result, an Obama presidency might just be the tip of the iceberg for the GOP.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Technology as empowerment

Well said. I saw a quote from somewhere that the Obama campaign's goal has been in general to maximize the number of new voters (instead the narrower, self-interested "maximize the number of new Obama voters") ...

We're having a discussion on the Voter Suppression Wiki about whether to shift to a partisan (or multipartisan) focus. While everybody agrees that voting rights are at their core a non-partisan issue, one of the two largest parties is running based on a strategy of voter suppression. What does "non-partisan" mean in this situation?

jon

Nonpartisan

Well, it should be a non-partisan issue. Non-partisan, to me, means having both sides agree that it's American with strategy and tactics that embraces that agreement.

So obviously voting rights is not a non-partisan issue right now because the GOP refuses to recognize it as such in their rhetoric, strategy/tactics, and sometimes both.

I like the multi-partisan label. The Democratic Party, the Green Party, and other parties do recognize voting as an inherent right in a democracy. Unfortunately, the GOP does not.

Which way is everyone leaning?

There are different opinions ...

No consensus as yet; Summaries here, with a few additional comments in the thread. We’re going to be doing some significant press later this week so we’ll have to decide soon.

People generally see the situation much as you do, but differ on the implications. Also one difficulty with a partisan or multi-partisan approach is that there are severe limitations on particaption for people involved with many 501(c)3’s.