2008: Candidate Centeredness, with a Shred of Party Influence

During the 2008 presidential elections, both major general election candidates led particularly ideologically moderate, candidate-centered campaigns with a touch of party influence in their campaign structures and of course their ideologies. Both Barack Obama (hope and change) and John McCain (unconventional maverick) created their own brand that was detached from their respective party's platform and brand. Each candidate took control of their party's message machine and both were burned by new media.

Obama with the help of many party loyalists (e.g. Senior Advisor Anita Dunn) and several candidate loyalists (e.g. Senior Strategist David Axelrod and Advisor Vallerie Jarrett) attempted to portray himself as a "post-partisan" candidate who had keen skill in working through ideological differences. This is a far cry from the modern Democratic Party's "netroots," which is driven by a liberal base of supporters and ideology. I think we are seeing this difference playing itself out as Obama attempts to govern. For example, it is pretty well-known in political junkie circles that Obama delegated the writing of the stimulus package to the House Democrats. Their automatic response was to craft a bill that critics consider somewhat of a liberal catharsis from the last 8 years. But in order for the bill to pass and to live up to his campaign pledge, Obama had to work with and gain the support of a handful of moderate Republicans. As a result some of the spending was removed. Now he has to smooth over some bruised feelings within the Democratic Party, particularly the Congressional Black Caucus.

McCain with the assistance of many of the GOP's loyal partisans (e.g. Campaign Manager Steve Schmidt and Senior Advisor Nicole Wallace) and some of his own core supporters (e.g. Senior Advisor Mark Salter), attempted to paint himself as the same maverick who ran for President in 2000. He was forced to run away from the Republican Party label and "netroots" because of the overwhelming negativity associated with the party name within the electorate. McCain's rhetoric highlighted his many bipartisan successes as a Senator and he regularly articulated instances when he chose to buck the GOP establishment and side with the Democrats in Congress. While this was his M.O., he was caught in a brutal election cycle for Democrats. Obama was pushing a similar message and was more persuasive with both liberal and moderate voters within the electorate.

Technological advances and new methods of communication are driving campaigns toward candidates and away from parties. Because candidates (particularly on the Presidential level) are required to raise a significant chunk of their own money to run their campaigns, they are taking control of the message and are required to provide the vision for harnessing new technologies. The Dean campaign in 2004 and the Obama campaign in 2008 are perfect examples. In neither case had the Democratic Party built a sophisticated technological apparatus that was able to effectively grasp modern technological tools. In addition 24 hour cable news and modern communication tools, such as YouTube are forcing candidates to take more control over their campaign. Because of a hyperactive media's willingness to associate petty statements made by 5 cent advisors and minor supporters, campaigns attempt to script all of the message sent out by the party. Despite the attempts at disciplilned message control, the new media has caused significant political problems for campaigns. Examples include Obama's "bitter" comments and McCain's "fundamentals" quote. Not to belittle the significance of either, but they both received excessive play throughout the campaign and were a product of 21st century media. We can certainly apply parts of this discussion to Congressional Campaigns, but not as much.

George Allen's Maccaca line was certainly an example of a candidate getting burned by new media. On the other hand, they have significant (although not entire) financial support of their respective Congressional Campaign committees, so they are more likely to relinquish some control to the party.

During the 2008 presidential campaign President Obama certainly adopted Teachout's advice for the development of a web-based community. Mybarackobama.com (which has morphed into Organizing for America) was a facebook-type organizing tool that "engage[d] numerous supporters on multiple initiatives." They used the web-site not only for personal fundraising (which they did at unprecedented levels), but also for blogging, listservs, and most importantly, meeting tools. When that infrastructure is transferred over to the Democratic National Committee, they will be technological light years ahead of their Republican counterparts.