Joe Trippi Predicts New Technology can Make a Presidential Candidate from Outside the Two Major Parties Viable

On March 13, Joe Trippi appeared on a panel in Austin, at a large national conference sponsored by South by Southwest Interactive. The panel subject was: “The people-powered revolution, fueled by the Internet and technology, will change the worlds of activism, media and politics.” Trippi predicted that social networking tools will make it possible for a presidential candidate from outside the two major parties to raise enough money to be competitive. See this Politico story.

Trippi was Howard Dean’s campaign manager in 2004. He has also written the book “The Revolution Will Not be Televised: Democracy, the Internet and the Overthrow of Everything.”

The other members of the panel were: (1) Pete Snyder, CEO of New Media Strategies; (2) Eric Kuhn, Hollywood’s first social media agent at United Talent Agency; (3) David All, founder of the David All Group, which helps companies and activist groups get their message out on the Internet.


Comments

Joe Trippi Predicts New Technology can Make a Presidential Candidate from Outside the Two Major Parties Viable — 10 Comments

  1. It’s…possible, but not entirely likely at this stage. Look at Ron Paul, he had an Internet presence ramped up on steroids, and he still only raised (while a lot for an “alternative” candidate) a fraction of what Obama and McCain ended up raising. I do think new technology makes it much easier for politics outside the mainstream to flourish though, if used correctly. I think we should try this strategy out on winnable elections like state legislative before we try to tackle the presidency…

  2. I seriously doubt it.

    Telephones, by making inter-state coordination easier, strengthened the hold of the top-two parties (or rather, put enough pressure on local parties that they either collapsed or joined with the national party.)

    I would expect social networking to continue that trend, not reverse it, *especially* at the presidential level.

  3. #1: You have the right direction that would be needed to change the current political picture. You would need to start locally to change a state, then work on a foothold in Congress, and finally the Presidency. Starting at the top is a non-starter without that state and congressional political support.

  4. Will the SCOTUS party hacks even uphold a 30 (repeat 30 ) percent nominating petition for non-Donkeys/Elephants —

    to PREVENT another 1860 timebomb election ???

    P.R. and nonpartisan App.V.

  5. Disagree with above. I think Rand Paul’s showing in Kentucky against both the Secretary of State [Primary] and the Attorney General [General] show that establishment candidates can be defeated.
    The Attorney General even had to bring up a college prank done by Paul because the “he has no experience” argument no longer works.
    The question is not will it happen, but when. I’m predicting 2016 is more likely than 2012.

  6. Ron Paul is a Republican also.
    My point is that someone who is not an establishment person (and did not have the support of the Republican Party until it was obvious he was going to win the primary and they were forced to help him) can win elections against establishment people.

  7. tiradefaction – look at what Paul’s campaign accomplished though. They raised his profile so much, they passed a watered down audit the fed bill, the Republicans are pandering (if not acting) toward libertarians like there’s no tomorrow (although that can also be credited to the pseudo libertarianism of the Tea Party), and he did get a lot of votes in the primaries. In the primaries, I think Paul actually did outraise McCain.

    I think online stuff can never replace real life activism though.

  8. “The people-powered revolution, fueled by the Internet and technology, will change the worlds of activism, media and politics.”

    Someone talking this in bar-even an upscale SWPL bar-would quickly find everybody avoiding him. Any challenge to the existing ruling elites and their hegemonic discourse needs actual ideas and a program. Technology in and of itself won’t depose the kind of elites that exist in the home base of the Empire.

    Barring economic collapse(which will probably bring about a whole lot of “people’s revolution”)only implementing low-threshold PR in a big enough legislative body-which is guaranteed to create new seated parties-outsiders can count on nothing more than victory in one-off or fluke scenarios. It’s always “one step forwards, two steps back” at best.PR combined with top-two or Approval Voting for executive offices would reinforce the erosion of duopoly.

    In low-threshold PR countries-like Israel and Netherlands- you’ll find that the emergence of significant new parties based on objects of public concern to be a regular ongoing process.

    Probably better to start off in initiative-referendum states with maximum home rule for counties and municipalities. Of course you have to address the local grievances and stay all from certain conspiracy theories.

    A new party that was started in Israel in 1983 and is now part of the ruling coalition:
    http://jewamongyou.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/my-involvement-with-shas/

  9. I am not sure Rand Paul is a good enough example in this thread. His campaign wasn’t known for using technology superior to his opponents. He ran a strong traditional campaign (using advertising, organizing and regular media relations) and rode the Tea Party tide into office. It was organization and motivated electorate that put him in office.
    I don’t think you can’t rely on technology alone to get people elected, which is what the original article basically says Trippi suggests.
    So let’s look at Ron Paul. He raised a lot of money, yes, but that really didn’t do anything for him except pick up higher percentage points in his losses.
    Since the article was about Trippi, just look at Howard Dean and by extension, meetup.com and moveon.org. This raised his profile and political strength, but could not put him over the top in a sustained way to win the nomination.
    The same thing happened to Pat Buchanan in 96. Buchanan had probably one of the best organized campaigns and made the best use of technology at the time, but this didn’t put him over the top either.
    Technology may empower us, but it really takes a sustained, committed struggle and good media relations to overcome the establishment.
    To really win, you have to embark on a strong traditional campaign using the TV/Radio/Print AND use social networking/technology as much as possible.
    Larry West said 2016 looks better than 2012. I’m not even sure I agree with that. 2016 might be feasible, but I’d look more to 2020 for minor parties. We keep talking about these anti-establishment candidates, but they are still working within the two established parties. They appeal to a certain segment of the party, their base. Minor parties have to work extra hard and take advantage of all technology just to build up their base. That’s the difference.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.