Disintermediation and Politics

code_rage writes "Everett Ehrlich (capsule biography) writes an article in the Washington Post that examines Howard Dean's effective use of the internet to create a political organization. He says that Dean has created a 'virtual' party that has taken over the only remaining asset of value, the brand name of the Democratic party. His analysis refers to the theory of Nobel-winning economist Ronald Coase: that the size of an organization is determined by the cost of gathering information. Ehrlich's article makes some predictions about the effect that Dean's strategy will have on the political system." In a related story, there's an mp3 interview with Dick Morris, along with a couple of (appropriately) blog posts about it.

Comments

Gore invented Howard Dean

[Anonymous Coward]

First, Gore invented the Internet. After he lost the election, he invented the beard, and the beer gut. Now he has invented the Howard Dean campaign.

What amazing wonders will come next from the Thomas Edison of our era?

Wrong

[GCP]

If you want stereotyping, just listen to any "englightened" "progressive" spout off about how

-- every successful company is an example of "Corporate Greed",

-- every white person who disagrees with a non-white person is a "Racist",

-- anyone who makes things but doesn't give them away for free is an "Oppressor",

-- anyone who thinks that what he makes should not be open to forced confiscation by those who don't make things is "Mean Spirited",

-- and every argument that even questions leftist dogma is "Hate Speech".

And you thought "name calling and stereotyping was primarily the tactic of the conservative[s]".

Think again.

Re:Nah.

[GSloop]

Like all that success we're having in Iraq?

Like all that success we had in Iran?

Like all that success we had in (insert virtually any South American country here...)?

Being a big bully is *great* - so long as you can always be the winner. (I don't actually believe this, but it *seems* that way at the time.)

What you need to remember, is that someday that bully isn't able to force everyone into submission. When that happens, there a line around the block to stick the knife in and twist it.

It's in our own best interest to act honestly and humble ourselves. Someday, we'll have to pay back, and if we've been jerks - I can tell you - paybacks are a bitch.

I'm not sure what Bush is - a talking monkey - who knows.

I'm a strongly religeious protestant, socially liberal, and find Bush's policies simply deluded.

I'd have voted for McCain, and I'll probably vote for Dean.

What I won't do, is vote for a dishonest chameleon who will sell me down the river for a piece of bubble-gum to the largest commercial interest. (And BTW, I didn't vote for Clinton - either time. But I'd generally prefer his *policies* to those of GWB - even though he did belong to the chameleon class.)

When the Republicans figure out they need to dump the crazy ass religeous right (Reid et al.) and really embrace the "personal freedoms" they espouse and actually get serious about smaller government (think less corporate welfare) then I'll vote Republican. Till then, I pick the least evil of the candidates I can. Dean and McCain before him fits that bill, not GWB.

Cheers,
Greg

Re:The end of the (non-)religious right?

[Zeinfeld]

Think about it: do you know anybody in the Moral Majority? No. The 'Moral Majority' faded away. Even Doctor Evil himself, John Ashcroft, doesn't shove his religion at people the way people trump it up.

The Moral Majority turned into the Christian Coalition. At this point it is not unusual for 70% of the board of a state republican party in the south to have come from the Christian Coalition.

The thing that has changed is that MM and CC are no longer able to bring out voters the way they once did. Having got their place in the party the apparachicks are less willing to work for it the way they once did.

Curious fact is that the Democrats regularly outpoll Republicans amongst Christians. The big divide is between the evangelicals who believe that the moral of the parable of the good samaritan is 'love thy neighbor' and the fundamentalists who claim the point Christ was making was the samaritan had the money to be able to afford to help.