2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumEzra Klein: A theory of how American politics is changing
Ezra Klein: A theory of how American politics is changingSo here's a hypothesis raw, incomplete, and potentially incorrect for why politics has been so surprising this year: the tools that party insiders use to decide both electoral and legislative outcomes are being weakened by new technologies and changing media norms. And so models of American politics that assume the effectiveness of those tools models which weight elite opinion heavily, and give outsiders and insurgents little chance have been thrown off.
The kind of campaigning that happens on television and before crowds is a small fraction of what's necessary to win a nomination, or lead a congressional delegation. The inside game courting donors, winning endorsements, influencing the primary calendar, securing key committee assignments, luring top staffers, working with interest groups makes up the bulk of politics.
Parties have a range tools they can use to influence both electoral and legislative outcomes, but the most important one in part because it underlies so many of the others is elite opinion.
Distilled to their essence, money, staff, and elite signaling all work to influence voters the same way: they shape the amount and kind of information voters possess.
The importance of this process and it remains important is diminishing. Voters have more information than ever before and they are able to shape and choose the information they get in unprecedented ways.
Bernie Sanders, for instance, received much more coverage than he would have in past elections because news organizations Vox included noticed that stories about Sanders would explode on social media. That was a sign that there was more momentum behind his candidacy than most in Washington recognized; a sign that wouldn't have existed, and so couldn't have been heeded, a decade ago.
None of this should be taken to mean that politics has become purely about outsider skills. Indeed, if I had to bet, I'd still say Hillary Clinton takes the Democratic nomination, and Marco Rubio wins the Republican nomination. But the relative importance of insider and outsider politicking is changing, and that's part of why talented outsider candidates have had such a good year while masters of the inside game have had such a bad year.
But who knows? I've been wrong before.
merrily
(45,251 posts)bidder.
aidbo
(2,328 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)offices going to the highest bidder.
senz
(11,945 posts)but this is only Ezra Klein. Yes, it's been abundantly clear for some time that the internet and all intereractive, on-demand, shareable, web-based communication would eventually have a consciousness-changing effect on the American public. And also, as we've witnessed, on politics, including revolutions, in other parts of the world, particularly the Middle East where young people are very tuned in.
Probably Ezra Klein's most useful insight is that party insiders (and do we have them around here? Do we? Do we? We sure as hell do) no longer control the conversation.
But they still control the debate schedule. They'll do what they can to kill Bernie's -- and the American people's -- chances.
We will have to do something about that.
Uncle Joe
(58,112 posts)senz
(11,945 posts)You have no idea how nice it feels to call someone "Uncle" again. I miss mine.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)snot
(10,478 posts)p.r., which enlists our emotions against our own rational, best interests, is very powerful, too.
We go through a similar cycle every time a new info-distribution technology is invented: at first, elites fail to recognize the threat, and for a while, the rest of us make some progress. Once elites realize the importance of the new technology, they exert themselves to gain control of it, and the free flow of info is throttled down to a manageable level.
This happened with the printing press, with tv, and is now rapidly happening with the internet.
sorechasm
(631 posts)Since nearly half of eligible voters are not compelled to vote due to deceitful campaigns, an honest campaigner has a lot of voters to pool from. Honest campaigners have many more tools to GOTV.
PBO taught us that 8 years ago. Among his other attributes, he received the lion's share of new voters.
reformist2
(9,841 posts)Springslips
(533 posts)Noooooooooooooooo Shhhhhhhhiiiiiiiiiittttttttt!