When making Dean/McGovern comparisons, what about the internet factor?

[He loved Big Brother]

When making comparisons bewteen Dean/McGovern/Dukakis, rarely does one mention the internet. Why is this? Like tv and radio, the web is the "new" galvanizing fist that can help us stomp the GOP, and unite supporters of any candidate in ways that are so productive, they've never before been witnessed in history?

The internet wasn't around back when those candidates were campaigning, and had it been, I am of the opinion they would have won, especially McGovern.

(Not to mention the power it has to raise campain contributions, I've donated to Dean almost solely through the web save for one fundraiser back in May when the good doctor first came to Seattle.)

The 'net is also especially useful in bringing in younger voters as well.

My opinion: The comparisons between past and present are almost useless because of the technology available to us now that wasn't available to us back when those candidates lost.

I'll also add that I believe, had Gore supporters utilized this tool as well as Dean supporters are doing now, Gore would have carried more states and supporters would have been to help fend off the vicious media attacks more successfully. There would have been more point-counterpoint...there should have been a Gore blog.

Hope I didn't break any GD rules with this question.

[Gore1FL]

1. The comparison to McGovern

has never made sense with the possible exception of both running against serious threats to America (assuming Dean gets the nomination).

[He loved Big Brother]

2. I posted ths before I spotted Will Pitt's article on Dean

I was in a hurry and haven't read DU in almost a week. A new record. I had just finished a conversation with yet another person who made the comparison. Will Pitt's article mentioned the internet right away, as have a few others here and there over the last few weeks.

Still, it seems the internet factor slips the majority of people's minds, it isn't a consideration in their critical thinking process when it comes to making these comparisons.

[Gore1FL]

4. I'll go farther

Still, it seems the internet factor slips the majority of people's minds, it isn't a consideration in their critical thinking process when it comes to making these comparisons.

There is very little critical thinking involved in comparing candidates of other times to current candiates.

Sure a case can be made for a McGovern Comparison to many of the candidates:

Kerry and McGovern are the same because they both won in MA.
Dean and McGovern are the same because both were mislabled as ultra liberal.
Lieberman and McGovern are the same because both experienced being on the losing side of a National election.
Clark and McGovern are the same as they were both accomplished in the military.
and the beat goes on....

So comparisons exist, but lets face it, they are all bullshit.

As far as the internet goes, it is certainly a differentiaion from McGovern as well as any previous candidate. The differentiation doesn;t begin or end there, however.

[Bombtrack]

3. The internet wouldn't have made america quasi-socialist and isolationist

McGovern wasn't just a liberal and anti-vietnam, his support came from the political fringe of the new left who were mostly "third-power" revolutionaries and Marxists apposed to the cold war in general

in addition to McGovern being for garenteed minimum incomes, which was a horrible idea.

Dean is not a quasi-socialist or anti-war on terror(the equivolent of what the cold war was then) and he probably wouldn't lose quite as badly as McGovern, but the notion of him getting 270 electoral votes is absurd considering all of his huge flaws.

He's a perfect storm for defeat, which is why he is STILL the GOP's dream candidate of the major candidates.

A huge amount of what he purports to be an "army" of supporters or whatever comes from tallies of anonymous mouseclicks and signups, which are easily duplicated and or come from the GOP, as well as his money being inflated by GOP-supporter donations.

[bearfartinthewoods]

5. the internet factor may be maxed out.

"THE INTERNET

To a greater extent than has been done before, Howard Dean’s campaign has utilized the Internet to raise campaign contributions, communicate information and generate enthusiasm among supporters. Among those likely Democratic primary voters who access the Internet, Howard Dean is the top candidate. 18% of this group would like to see him as the nominee, followed by Wesley Clark with 13% and Gephardt with 11%.

But Democratic primary voters don’t seem much more likely than registered voters overall to be using the Internet to obtain information about candidates -- and fewer than one in five are doing so. 16% of Democratic primary voters with Internet access (and 17% of registered voters) have visited a campaign, candidate, party or other political web site for information on the upcoming presidential election. "

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/23/opinion/polls/main590018.shtml

[John_H]

6. The McGovern thing is not about the ability to create voters w/ the Web

The point is there are just too many voters who will choose Chimp over Dean. Dean's done a great job organizing angry young dems (Ie the majority of internet savvy people. The problem is there just ain't enough to beat chimp.

All of these arguments are very well thought out. But the fact is simple--Clark takes away Chimp's winning issue. Dean does not.

[HFishbine]

7. Right on

The elusive piece of this phenomenon is cultural: the Internet. Rather than compare Dr. Dean to McGovern or Goldwater, it may make more sense to recall Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy. It was not until F.D.R.'s fireside chats on radio in 1933 that a medium in mass use for years became a political force. J.F.K. did the same for television, not only by vanquishing the camera-challenged Richard Nixon during the 1960 debates but by replacing the Eisenhower White House's prerecorded TV news conferences (which could be cleaned up with editing) with live broadcasts. Until Kennedy proved otherwise, most of Washington's wise men thought, as The New York Times columnist James Reston wrote in 1961, that a spontaneous televised press conference was "the goofiest idea since the Hula Hoop."

more: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/arts/21RICH.html?ei=5007&en=035abc452122c4ec&ex=1387342800&partner=USERLAND&pagewanted=print&position=n=

[He loved Big Brother]

8. Thanks for posting this

I read this article when it came out and forgot to save it. It is definitely right on the money.

:dem:

[sweetheart]

9. The internet's demographics fail to impress..

Its the rich households who are on the internet, and you are an example... you are likely not homeless, an ex-con, non-white or of lower economic quintiles. Sure there are exceptions, but that is the deal... exceptions. The people we need to turn out, the disenfranchised voters who are more likely to be poor, unemployed and even homeless... those people are unimpressed by an internet dandy.

I think the republicans like dean for exactly that reason. DU only exists if you read it... and the internet is a small minority of americans compared to television. The democrats can rule the internet forever and never win an election by it... it is print, television and radio that are the mass media. Until they are singing the praises of the democratic candidacy, there is no swansong.

[He loved Big Brother]

11. I own a non-profit voter awareness organization-

-aimed somewhat at that demographic. It isn't about getting every voter to sit in front of a screen before they decide who to vote for. In order of importance, my organization aims to reach out to voters who are: 18-29, have attended little or no college (high-school dropouts included), fall into a low-income bracket, and have little to no access to a computer. But a lot of the help I am getting (actually, most of the help I am getting) is through people whom I've met and/or communicate with via the internet. The internet brings people together who will in turn reach out to inform non-wired voters, of which there are aplenty, you're right.

There might be a significant difference between the amount of wired households vs households with televisions, yes, but TV is not a very useful tool for grass-roots, whereas the internet has unlimited possibilities. Television offers no means for the individual supporters to plan, organize, download/print information to share, communicate with one another, etc. The internet helps supporters do all of that, and quickly. Once those who are wired utilize the tools available through the web, they can then go spread the word to those who are not wired, and do so in a more successful and influential manner. :toast:

[vi5]

10. There is just as much bad about the internet vis a vis elections

Honestly, while it is good that people have been able to harness it for raising money and outreach, and meet up and stuff like that, the fact is that what most people search on the internet is by choice. So unless someone is actively seeking something out it's not going to sway a lot of undecideds and independents who decide the elections. It may be a great way for like minded people who already agree to get together but that doesn't really win over a lot of votes.

Factor in that it's just as strong a tool for the other side. Witness the ridiculous volume of erroneous right wing spam e-mails that people like my independent but left leaning parents get and believe most of the time and the influence that dreck like that has on people. The fact is that someone who is an undecided independent is not going to go to truthout, or moveon.org or buzzflash or whatever and read that information. However, they may get a friendly sounding e-mail telling them that Howard Dean did this or John Kerry said that or here are some statistics on what Democrats have done and so on and so forth, which they will actually believe because it came from someone they know and it just sounds so darn true.

So yeah, there is some good from the internet thing but there's just as many daunting, opposing factors that will play against us.

[mitchum]

12. The internet factor is why I liken Dean to "The Blair Witch Project"

let's hope he has better legs than that internet "phenomenon"