Enthusiasm Over Electability

When Bob Dole waged his dismal campaign for President in 1996, I don't remember seeing stories about an "enthusiasm gap" nearly to the extent we see them today. What you did see were constant reminders of Clinton's yawning lead in the polls. Perhaps an enthusiasm gap was simply assumed. Or Republicans were plenty fired up about Bill Clinton, but were left without an effective electoral outlet.

Today, all we see are enthusiasm gap stories and their cousins -- the age meme, the Obama crowds meme, the McCain-doesn't-go-online meme. The media isn't attempting to bury McCain like it buried George H.W. Bush or Bob Dole, through bad polls. They're trying to bury him on the intangibles, chief among them the energy and grassroots enthusiasm gap between the two candidates.

I believe this shift from hard data to intangibles is a function of the Internet-driven base mobilization era in which we now live. The media has basically conceded that the election will be patterned after 2000 and 2004, in that it will be close. In close elections, polls can't tell you who'll win as reliably. So the emphasis is on derivative factors like the GOTV operation or crowd size or enthusiasm which will enable one candidate to outperform the polls. The Rove model, which 1) the media buys into, and 2) places a heavier emphasis on an energized base over tacking to the center, has perversely redounded to the benefit of Obama, who has the energized base this year.

Back in the Republican primary, McCain's big argument was electability. But in an environment in which the most electable candidate will also be pilloried by the media (and to be fair, the base itself) as the least energizing candidate, I'm not sure we should be deciding primaries on electability in the future. Assuming the electability gap between the candidates is small enough, the ability to generate grassroots enthusiasm can make up for being less "electable."

In an environment like the '80s and '90s when most of what that mattered were polls and ads, electability was king. But now, partly as a result of the netroots/rightroots and troll commenters on media blogs, the media is plugged into the thought process of each party base like never before. They're more focused on the ideological bases than in writing profiles of the quintessential undecided voter in Cape Girardeau, Missouri or Canton, Ohio. The thought process of undecided voters can be random, but the behavior of the conservative and liberal bases is systematic and hence, easier to analyze.

The bases, through the Internet and talk radio, also have the ability to communicate laterally like never before, making them even more powerful. Is it no wonder that the number of true independent-independents continues to shrink every year?

What the bases say can submarine a candidate more easily because it's more ingrained in the media narrative than it was a few elections ago.

The old Nixonian maxim of run to the right in the primary, and to the center in the general, is out the window. It's been replaced by running on whatever will keep the crowds stoked for 24 months straight, because that's what leads to better stories and better mojo.