On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, shag wrote:
> I was listening to the talking heads on MSNBC and they were going on
> about how Obama basically ignored the traditional Democratic party
> structure.
This seems like nonsense. Both the internet fundraising concentration and the 50 state strategy were both right out of Howard Dean's playbook. And he's the chairman of the Democratic party.
> Doug's pointed out how, if it's all 50 bucks here and there from
> individuals, there's no much of an organizational structure to hold a
> politician's feet to the fire.
Really? Because you can just as easily interpret exactly the opposite: that because 1/2 of Obama's money came from little donations, he is more beholden to keeping his base excited about him than any previous Dem. Because if they stop being excited, they'll still vote for him, but they won't cough up money and they won't people his machine. The machine is an indispensable thing you've always needed a base for which has always meant a candidate has to pay some attention to their mood. But normally they could get virtually all their money from the rich or from organizations. Now you need the base for that too -- not for all of it, but for enough of it to make the difference.
Michael