RK ARCHIVE - Republicans "Losing the Web" to Democrats...But Will It Last?

I love it: Republicans have an "instinctive fear of the Internet," a place that's not rigidly top-down or disciplined, where the atomsophere is "often chaotic, bottom-up, user-generated." Instead, Republicans appear - as I've been saying for a long time - to like the more passive, directed, "dittohead" style of Limbaugh-style talk radio.

In contrast, Democrats appear to be kind of into this quaint thing known as "democracy" - "talking and discussing and fighting." Fortunately for Democrats, there's something to that Democacy thang; according to Peter Leyden, director of the New Politics Institute, it "energizes everyone, involves everyone, and gets people totally into it." In other words, Democracy and dissent are forms of strength, not weakeness - as many on the right would have us believe. And it's also a heck of a lot more interesting than the echo chamber and coordinated "noise machine" messaging of the right. Yawn.
Of course, not all is perfect on the Democratic blogosphere. For instance, here in Virginia we've got a state party in which at least several top leaders simply don't get it at all, still "stuck in Internet circa 2000" or maybe even further back in the '70s or '80s. For some of these people, it's almost like the internet boom of the 1990s never happened, that the netroots revolution - the one that helped bring about the phenomena of Howard Dean, Wes Clark, Paul Hackett, Ned Lamont, Jon Tester, and of course Jim Webb - is some passing phenomenon that can and should be ignored. Big mistake.

One big mistake by certain Democratic Party leaders is the assumption that if you just build a new website with fancy technology, people will come. Well, no. The fact is, the success of Democratic and progressive activists on the internet is not first and foremost about technology at all. It's about people, culture, attitude, engagement, and empowerment. The question is whether or not Party "powers that be" are willing to adapt to this new culture or not. To date, it seems that Democrats have adapted faster than Republicans, but there's still resistance, indifference, or even hostility among the Luddite faction. Still, Democrats are outpacking Republicans, and it's not about how much money they have or their access to technology.

Look, Republicans and Democrats both have a lot of money and they both have access to the same technology. Yet Republicans are generally "losing the Web" to the Democrats, even Republican activists and experts acknowledge. Why is this? Because Democrats are much more adapted to the flatter, "bottom up," participatory/non-passive, rought-and-tumble citizen activist-driven culture of the internet.

The key now is not resting on our laurels, but taking this to the next level. Here in Virginia, several netroots/Webb activists, led by my good friend Josh Chernila, spent months conceptualizing and attempting to sell a political version of the "killer ap," what came to be called "YouRoots." In addition, Josh conceived an entire new concept of netroots and grassroots integration with the Democratic Party in his brilliant "DEMPAC" concept.

Unfortunately, right now DEMPAC and YouRoots are on life support, as many top Democrats have expressed interest but very few have provided the resources to actually make it happen. Thus, Josh's vision of "creating an enduring Democratic majority in Virginia" remains no more than a vision. And the sad thing is that Josh and Company only needed a miniscule amount of money in the grand scheme of things to get YouRoots up and running. Maybe $30,000, a pittance that would not even have been a rounding error in Tim Kaine's or Jerry Kilgore's 2005 expenditures.

All of which raises the question: why are Democrats (and Republicans, for that matter) so willing to give money to campaigns that come and go, but not towards building long-term grassroots/netroots infrastructure that could provide FAR GREATER "bang for the buck" in both the short and long runs? Is it because many Democrats continue to operate on the traditional, "top-down" worldview that you give money to political candidates or to the Party, not to "grassroots" groups. Is it a failure of imagination? Is it that, as Markos Moulitsas and Jerome Armstrong describe in "Crashing the Gate," traditional party elites feel threatened by the "Netroots Rising" (the title of my upcoming book with fellow netroots activists Nate Wilcox)?

The point of this rambling semi-rant is that Republicans may CURRENTLY be "losing the Web" to Democrats now, but if the "blue team" isn't proactive it could lose that edge - FAST! True, Democrats are protected by the fact that Republican top-down, dittohead culture simply isn't naturally conducive to the blogosphere (despite silly, transparent, and heavy-handed efforts to game the system). However, if we don't keep moving forward, we will die just like a shark. Or, we can keep moving and become "Jaws," a creature that all fear for its unstoppable killing power.

The question is, are Democratic "insiders" willing to seize their natural advantages and "go for the jugular?" Are they willing to cough up the resources needed to extend our netroots advantage over Republicans even further? Or, are they content to sit back and watch the grassroots do their thing, thriled (albeit baffled in many cases) that it seems to be working, while occasionally getting discombobulated and agitated when it inevitably goes "off message?"

To put it another way, will Democrats seize the new moment, or will they keep their heads stuck in the sand, throwing increasing amounts of money to chase an ever-fragmenting (and decreasingly receptive) TV advertising audience? Will they stick with the "proven" (actually, they're not proven) old methods of direct mail and top-down media advertising, or will they wrap their brains around this new world, the power equivalent - or greater - as the birth of radio and television? In the end, it comes down to this: how badly do Democrats want to win, and how willing are they to adapt - rapidly, continuously, aggressively - to make that happen? We'll see in coming months and years, but for the sake of everything we care about, I sure hope my fellow Democrats make the right choice.

Comments

"...quaint thing known as 'democracy'..." (cycle12 - 5/21/2007 8:18:18 AM)

Accurate diary, good points, excellent line, Lowell.

Thanks!

Steve

Democrats are intellectually more honest (Shenandoah Democrat - 5/21/2007 8:51:04 AM)

Not to oversimplify, but for some time I've thought that modern day corporate and evangelical driven Republican politics simply are not intellectually grounded but based more on self interest (corporations) and emotions/ religious beliefs,(evangelicals).
The idea of discourse, debate, chaos, differing viewpoints etc., just doesn't fit into many Republicans' overly material, self-righteous, fear-driven (read paranoid), and/or religion-obessed life view. You have to change the narrow selfish ideology to attract internet users, and all the websites and money in the Godawful Oleaginous Party aren't going to do that. The intellectual bankruptcy of the party must be addressed--the internet will be a big problem for the GOP until they make their politics more real and responsive to thinking people.
I only hope Lowell will rant on about these and other topics in his book and on-line--they are one of the best things about RK. Show me a right wing site with comparable intelligence, empathy and, most important reason.

It also.... (Terry85 - 5/21/2007 12:19:16 PM)

May have something to do with the fact that "Political blogging" has EXPLODED in popularity over the past five or so years, and let's face it -- it's much easier for Democrats to write about all that's going wrong than it is for Republicans to write about what's going right (no pun intended). It will be interesting to see if Democrats continue to dominate the blogosphere when we take the White House in '08.

Excellent point Terry (novamiddleman - 5/21/2007 10:20:27 PM)

As an example just look at what is happening with the democratic congress or even with Webb

With each issue the moderates or liberals are offended and it spills over onto the blogs

Another example is the virtual being spit whenever a post comes up about Obama/Edwards/Hillary. The attack dogs really come out

The beauty/curse of us as bloggers with politicians are we are never satisfied until we get everything we want :-) We are worse than the talking heads with the ferocity of our opinions and we won't let people get away with things. Personally I find this healthy but it does cause tension with the next paragraph people

Now there is a class of bloggers that are actually political operatives that push a particular party over actual issues. However they are in the minority IMHO

other reasons (presidentialman - 5/21/2007 2:21:08 PM)

I think also it has to do with association. The power of the internet wasn't born with the midterms of 06, it was born of the presidential primary of 03-04 when Howard Dean gave us that bi juggarnuaght of a site that showed how you can fundraise and get people together etc.. Now Dean was dismissed by the GOP because he failed. So as things would have it the GOP thought he and his supports were left-wing wackos, not concerned citizens. So I think that's why George Allen, Joesph Liebreman got broadsided, in the midterms. And I think that's why GOP will get broadsided in the 08 race. The People, us, got angry because our views weren't being addressed, and our views like Global Warming concerns, fit more into the Democratic Party profile and the DEMS saw "opportunity and took it" as George Washington Plunkitt might say.

but (novamiddleman - 5/21/2007 10:26:33 PM)

there is a class on our side as well. The conservative right is as strong as ever. The key for both groups to remember is that you don't represent the majority of the population

The far right and far left are the most active but they each might make up 10% of the population.

Whatever party moderates the most usually wins.

Now Karl Rove successfully persued a differnt strategy of divide and conquer but usually that doesn't work. Especially with democrats who were outnumbered

However, now due to Bush and the Iraq war the pendulum has tipped. There are now more Democrats than Republicans. A karl rove divide and conquer strategy would propably work for Democrats

Hillary Clinton knows this. I cant figure out Obamas long-term strategy for the life of me and Edwards is the standard bearer of the far left.

Building Power (Lee Diamond - 5/21/2007 4:05:19 PM)

I'll pass for now on the opportunity to break down the Republicans and the trap they've built for themselves. It is an impressive prison, I must say.

I think that what Lowell has written is most applicable to the consultant class in Washington. It seems that the "professionals" have gone too far and sapped too much of the life force out of politics and campaigns. There are good ideas out there for reinvigorating our political culture. We have not been at this long enough to give up. We have to keep moving. I'll gladly engage with people on the ideas Lowell raised in his post.

We are the antidote to this problem. We are the change. Keep the faith.