In the case of a frontrunner candidate could successfully use the Internet or is it inherently a tool of insurgent candidates, I believe he/she must use it because there is no way a campaign will move a step forward without the Internet. It is proved from 2008 election where many fundraising, micro targeting and grassroots organizing have taken place online. Therefore Internet is no longer a tool for outside candidates, it is for both frontrunners and insurgent candidates.

Howard Dean introduced a very important tool to the political campaign arena, the Internet. Politics have changed since then. Political campaigns strategies have developed and included the Internet in its components. As we have seen in this election that Internet was taking a big share of the campaigns and many mainstream media talked about it and covered what had happened online.

Internet has become the power of democracy, the power is in the hand of voters who donate the $5 or $10, not the big wallets who fund 75% of the campaigns, Joe Trippi said in this book the Revolution Will Not Be Televised, “Power is back in our hands”. This means that democracy is implemented through the Internet.

Though big money will still have its role in 2012 race to set the engine for the online but their influence will diminish in the future because the online campaign will part if not dominate the campaign itself. We will see in the near future that big dollars and small online donation will have an equal role in political campaigns. 

Joe Trippi sums up in his book what has happened in this election and gave us a good background of what happened in Dean’s campaign. The Dean campaign and Obama campaign have opened the Internet to frontrunners. Both Dean and Obama were able to reach voters through Internet. Obama has pushed to the second level; he empowered millions of ordinary people to take over his campaign and decided what to do for the future of the country “Change”. Sen. Clinton didn’t take Trippi’s advice to run as “a Change Candidate” and she took lobbyist’s money. Definitely, Trippi was reading the future.

The success of Dean and Obama will be the reason for candidates using the Internet and the increase of online campaigns. Both Obama and Dean were able to organize groups through meetup.com and mybarackobama. Moreover, they raised a lot of money through online donations.  Insurgent candidates and frontrunner candidates will use the Internet in their campaigns. Both will have a better Internet future with all the development and organization.

Obama taught us a very good lesson in 2008 election. He was the first one who used the Internet as a frontrunner and used it effectively as a campaign tool because young generation is more into high-tech than the older one. The question to me is, does technology is enough to make voters decide right? I think it is not enough, connection, inspiration and leadership may not be sensed through technology. In this case, we really need balance between digital campaign and on ground campaign.

 The 2008 Presidential campaign was a historical and a revolutionary one in all its aspects. After a long history of discrimination and civil rights movement, The US has written the new chapter of its story, the story of nothing is impossible in this nation.

Looking back into the primaries, it was a distinguished moment to see the democrats to choose a first lady and an African American to run to the most important position in the World. Voters didn’t care of the experience or the background of their candidates; they were looking for change, change that will move the path of their nation into a different level. On the other side of the coin, Republican moved outside their crystal ball and chose the first  female to be their Vice president nominee.

However, many new developments were taking place in this election, the technology became the message and the medium as Garrett Gaff said in his book The First Campaign.

Many lessons we learned during this election. Online fundraising that Obama campaign has developed. He has set the rules when he succeeded to raise half billion USD from small donation that came from public, lobbyists were out and failed to influence this race. Online Funding has turned to be the new method of political campaigning in the US.

New media have stepped in and took their share of the market. Reporting and analyzing what happened in and behind the scenes. It demonstrated that it could be the alternative to the mainstream media even many would argue this point. Yet, no one could ignore its existence anymore

Moreover, YouTube has played a huge role in the 2008 race. It was the medium for many generated voter content. Many personal initiatives were presented in the YouTube. Thousands of online videos were broadcasted. YouTube and was verified the medium of the citizen democracy.

Micro-targeting was the tactic to win this election. It was unbelievable to find out how consuming habit data could be turned into a political equation and then a strategy to get voters to polls. Many didn’t think that what we like or hate are essential to political strategists and election.

It was unexpected to see battleground states voted earlier. The early voting helped to tide polls to Obama’s advantage.

A lot of funny of human and sad moment accompanied this election. Tina Fey’s show, Saturday night shows and racism incidents in certain states were there. Many accusations and negative campaigning that made people laugh and upset.

In the past, many younger voters turned their backs to elections for many years. However, this election was different. Facebook, election.twitter.com and other social networks made them come back and were part of it. Young voters were active and engaged in expressing their feelings and their views. The social networks turn the American election into an international one. Facebook moved the American election from a national one into an international one.  All the International Facebookers participated in it.

November 4th, this day was a historical day. In Washington, Americans and Internationals ran to the street and marched to the White House, crying hugging and celebrating. John McCain’s speech was the best speech ever. We had nothing but to respect Sen. McCain as warrior who fought for his country and put the US first. Whether we agree with him or not, his pledged to serve his country deserved our admiration. We will always remember the email we received from Obama before he addressed the nation in Grant Park, thanking everyone for his/her contribution. It was a very touching email that made supporters feel special and the victory was not President Elect Obama but theirs.

Definitely, there are many memorable events and moments for us to keep observing till 2012 election.

The weekend after the Election Day I ended up at a party arranged by an Arab Bureau Chief of one of the elite international networks. Many familiar faces were there: famous analysts, anchors from different networks, print correspondents and broadcasters from all over the Arab World. The occasion was to celebrate the victory of President Elect Obama. It is weird to see Arabs happy and excited about a leader, I guess because he is not one of the leaders we have back home. I guess we will never see a celebration like that in the Arab World soon for reasons that we all know.

 Someone screamed from behind, a glass of wine in his hand, “He made it, everyone including me thought this country will never elect a black president.” A Lebanese women replied, “Well, he had a good campaign and wired staff, don’t you agree.” Here, I had to jump in and speak because I was more confident of the knowledge I learned from my class and said, “Yes, indeed. We, in the class, followed this campaign online.” I paused figuring out the second sentence and said.” It was different and had a different taste to see what Obama did over the Internet.”

A man in his late sixties asked me what I meant. I said to myself it is my chance to sound smart and try to find a job or an internship in one of these networks. I said to him how the social networks such as Facebook and Twitter were active among voters conveying their views during the debates and on Election Day. “Twitter, for instance, is a social network which is banned by many Arab regimes and used by civil activists in Egypt to keep what is called ‘spreading democracy’,” I said. “Twitter had set a page ‘election.twitter.com’ to allow voters during the debates to tweet what they think. The amazing point is in almost every second a new message was posted and I had the chance to observe what voters thought of the debate.”

Then I moved to bloggers and explained how they were engaged in analyzing and stating their views and how the American mainstream media used to host them all the time. The man couldn’t believe that social networks were involved in the process. I understand his disbelief. Social networks in the Arab world are used either for human rights activities or matchmaking among the boys and girls.

 “Abu Hussein”, or the Father of Hussein is the name many Arabs call President-Elect Obama. People were following the election because we are involved in politics more than any other nation and because of networks, which still dominate the media scene in the Arab world. In addition to that, the American election has a direct impact on our region. Nonetheless, the social networks such as Facebook, which has become so popular among young Arabs made them more involved in the process of expressing their ideas and views. Facebook was the platform that provided the opportunity to exchange comments, free ideas and feelings that many Arab parliaments and national councils do not provide. For that reason, many Arab regimes are struggling with this new concept of “social networks” and think that it is a threat to their security and their power.

A journalist from an interesting country, whose Internet is monitored by their regime, said to me, “But after eight years of Bush Administration, that produced of a negative image of Americans around the World, Iraq war, economic crisis and many other issues are the reasons behind Obama’s success. The Internet is useless in these circumstances.”

I looked at him and I was shocked at the last sentence, “Internet is useless”. All that he said about the war and economic crisis was true and they were the reason behind Obama winning. However, what this campaign did over the Internet and what I witnessed among the young Arabs, who have a Facebook page, is a revolution to me, because I have not seen that before. Obama’s campaign succeeded in moving social networks from matchmaking Websites to political ones in the Arab world. Through the Internet, we became more involved and can see other things. Internet is not useless. Actually, he is useless.

The Obama campaign was able to move the election overseas through online campaigning. Many of my friends back home, were surprised when they heard how the Obama campaign sent text-messages to his supporters for big announcements. Back home, cell phones are used for sending silly jokes and love notes.

I said to the man who thought Internet is useless, “just imagine you had freedom and democracy back home and the “X” leader sent you an email before he headed to address your nation, like Obama did when he sent his email before speaking in Grant Park, what would you feel?” He Said, “I feel I did him a favor but how can he get my email address?” I said, “ You need to learn about Digital campaigns and Internet.”

It is not expected to see radical changes in the While House 02. Don’t think you will be able to set your web camera and meet over the Internet the President or any of his senior staff. However, there will be obvious developments in the White House  online operations as President Elect Obama promised.

The US is facing many challenges such as the economic crisis, energy and two wars in the Middle East. Therefore, President Elect Obama wants to engage Americans more in the political process since his mission is very difficult.

President Elect Obama has promised that he will open the door of democracy again, and encourage people to involve in the government. Definitely the citizen democracy that we saw during election will continue in the new administration.

Change.gov is a very important beginning to predict what is going to happen in the White House 02. Change.gov is a well designed website, it provides services to people such as news update, job opportunities and many other classic activities. Yet, the distinguished service is “share your story”.  This particular service is important to predicate what Obama’s administration is trying to do to move the government not only the White House into the second level. There might be a kind of communication tool between people and their administration, but it is worth it to wait and find out.

President Elect Obama will be addressing his message so easily without going to the mainstream media. He will be in contact with millions of American through the YouTube. For example, the weekly radio message that is established by President Reagan has lost it listeners. President Elect Obama will take this tradition into the second level to enter the 21^st century. He will be addressing people through YouTube and online video.

Co-Chair of the Obama transitions team, Valerie Jarrett has also posted a clip informing viewers on the transition progress.  She also talks about some of the major changes that have already occurred, such as Obama selecting Rahm Emanuel to be his Chief of Staff. Change.gov might be the platform of secretaries to talk about their plans and policies to give the people the same feeling they got from Obama, the sense of personal campaigning.

I would like to attend staff meetings and find out how they proceed and make their decision like what is happening in the transition process.

Definitely, there will see major expansion in the While House communication operations that allow the President Elect Obama to reach all over the US. There is a huge gap between Obama Campaign and what they have done in 21 months and the Bush Administration. They have achieved in less than two years what Bush didn’t achieve in eight years. There is a gap between Obama’s Team and the government, therefore, Obama Administration will push the government tech-infrastructure forward.

Duane Hoffmann / MSNBC illustrations

Amazingly, how simple information can do, it can send to the Oval Office

Moms for Obama, Jews for Obama and many other groups held their signs in most of President Elect Obama’s rallies. It was the first race to witness such an obvious categorization. Apparently, Obama campaign has stepped further and moves the micro-targeting of President George W Bush and Clinton way ahead. 

Obama campaign didn’t succeed in gathering people under what they had in common and shared but created inside them the well to vote for President Elect Obama, as they knew how to target them. His campaign was involved in voters’ personal interests or in other word in their life. The issue is not only “give me your cell phone and I will tell you who is my Vice President”, it is in their ability to know what you like or don’t like, to get involve inside and direct you to what they wanted to achieve “voting for Obama”. Datamining, which is usually used by Business intelligence organizations and financial strategists were able to generate and sort data that might be unimportant to you, however, helped Obama campaign to cast your vote to his advantage. This information may include everything you expect and not expect, from what football-team do you like to what TV Channel you Watch.

Indeed, the micro-targeting mechanism was the passport to get Obama’s message out to his targeted voters. Moreover, the message addressed was formed to satisfy the targeted voters, what they wanted to hear, regardless to the capability of achieving what is in the message included “the promise”.

George W. Bush was re-elected in 2004 because his campaign succeeded to use the Micro-targeting tool. For instance, they conducted a research and a strategy to reach to center right voters. They were able to find out that Center right voters did not trust traditional media networks, therefore, Bush campaign had to reach them by using different media tools. The advance step in 2008 election is mybarackobama.com. This engine was able to gather, sort and drag the voters to Obama’s side. Obama Campaign has arranged comprehensive and extensive efforts to enable them to focus on the objected voters, in addition to the addressed message, which became a tool at this case. Message (tool) was designed to the right segment of voters to drag them to the polls. Voters heard what they wanted to hear without recognizing that Obama campaign has invaded their personal life through datamining and micro-targeting.

Using subscription data, shopping habits or maybe knowing your favorite food may not be important to many of us, nonetheless, it is very fundamental to political campaign. Campaigns’ strategists will not look at these data as simple as they might seem to be, yet these data are essential and strategists will look at them theoretically. It seems that these data are part of a calculation, x and Y can be over the candidate A. To them this information is voters.

Voters are inviting campaigns to their homes, which is scary to all of us. However, did any of us ask the question about these messages that were sent by Obama. In other words, can Obama achieve what he said in his rallies or it is just messages and promises that voters wanted to hear because his campaign knows much about us?  

Micro-targeting is privacy invasion and there is a possibility that voters were dragged to vote without asking and analyzing the How and Why.

Last night was the Democratic night and The US celebrated.

I failed to find a party to experience my first election in the US. Therefore, I decided to spend it at home. I prepared a traditional dish, opened a bottle of wine and had my laptop set on Twitter and various blogs in addition to flipping from one channel to another monitoring and observing. The best part for me was to see and hear the tone of Fox news. It was calm, sad and close to what we call in journalism, “fair coverage.” The negative ads disappeared; there was no Sean Hannity or O’Reilly, it was real journalism coverage stating facts and figures. CNN was busy showing their technological abilities and how their magic board works.

Facebook and Twitter astonished me in this big day. Facebook made the American election an international one. Friends from all over the world were engaged and enthusiastic about this election. Election.twitter.com was so active and tweeting among voters, stating their comments on the process and reporting “I voted McCain”, “I voted Obama” and the reason behind their votes.

Announcements and projections started, Ohio voted Obama and my phone beeped. My friend from the Syrian Embassy said “Game is over”, another beep from Canada, my cousin saying “Congrats! We are celebrating here in Canada. Go Obama Go”. I could not wait when I heard all these noises outside, I ran out to U Street and I observed more. Black, white, Hispanic, young, old, gay, straight, all are under one flag, the American flag, marching towards the White House, screaming “Obama”. At that moment, my mind flashed back and realized how many flags we have in the Arab world. I remembered our “election”, people have to vote for one candidate, must march or they will end in security departments and the candidate has to win 99% “no matter what”. 

The 2008 election is unique in all aspects. It is the first election in American history with an African American nominee and also there is the possibility of the first woman as a vice-president. Regardless of gender and race, people are more interested in this election for its keyboard activities and how both campaigns are battling online to get as many voters as they can.

Both campaigns are serious in their effort to reach voters through social networks, YouTube and others Internet technologies. Analysts have stated that the Obama campaign is more successful than McCain especially when it comes into online activities. Surprisingly, if you go to John McCain’s website, you can play “Pork Invaders” and you can have the application on your Facebook page. It includes a message about extravagant government spending. On the other hand, if you want to play online Incredible Hulk, you will see Obama’s ads. The average 18 to 35-year old is hard to reach through TV, therefore, a successful tactic has been to reach them through these video games.

The usage of the Internet from the two campaigns has been for one purpose, which is to influence and reach potential voters. This presidential election is considered to be the most expensive race and candidates are using online fundraising to generate more money and voters. Sen. Obama has succeeded in raising hundreds of millions, however, most of his funds are spent to advertise in the traditional media and to fund his ground campaign.

There is a popular perception that Obama is winning the election because of his mastery of the digital domain. He has mybarackobama, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Google’s support, his website attracts three times as many hits as McCain’s.

But for all his success of creating buzz and raising money online, there are very traditional forces working in his favor. The US is facing one of the biggest economic crises and it is different from that in the Great Depression because this crisis has consequences that are affecting the global world.

Historically, whenever the election’s central issue is the economy, Democrats win. If the focus of this election is national security and there were different circumstances, Republicans will have the advantage. The process is not in social networks or online games, it is about the general notion of what the country is facing from political and economical aspects and the general circumstances of the majority of voters who decide what is the best for them. It is unquestionable that what is happening on the Internet is now part of the election but it is very difficult to prove that it has a substantial effect on the final results.

If Obama wins, everyone who believes in new media will say it was the Internet, but there is no way to prove that–elections are still won by getting more votes, not more blog posts or donations. Blogs, online games, social networks don’t get people to the polls to vote, field campaigns do, and while technology helps, it is still foot soldiers and grunt work—along with a winning candidate with a winning message.

The 2008 Election is highly driven by online tools. Bloggers, YouTube, Facebook, Myspace, Twitter and others are making analysts and journalists focus on and praise their influence on this race.

The use of online campaigning by the Obama Campaign has become an illustration of how to structure a successful campaign in the US. Moreover, others believe that it is the reason why Obama is winning. Howard Dean is being credited for laying the groundwork for online campaigning. Nowadays, it is the topic to talk about: Obama and fate of the Dean Campaign who failed to win the primary election. Is Obama winning because of the Internet or because of his substance/message?

Indeed, Howard Dean was the first candidate who built a political machine to gather average Americans and bring them together in Internet-generated “meet ups”. He urged supporters to stay connected, to get involved and contribute. He also succeeded raising phenomenal amounts of money through his online fundraising engine. Nevertheless, he lost the primary in 2004. Did his message keep the voters connected and involved? Was the substance of his message strong enough to get new voters in other states such as Illinois? The answer is NO.

Howard Dean was angry and frustrated all the time at the war in Iraq. His main tack was to criticize President Bush. He was stuck in the past and talking about what had happened and the consequences of the Bush administration’s war in Iraq.

Instead, John Kerry, for instance, who voted to authorize the war, defined his position in a more nuanced way, arguing that Bush failed in handling the war. Rather than appeal to the hard left of the Democratic base, he took a more moderate approach.

At that time, Democratic analysts argued that Republicans do a better job handling national security, for that reason, all Democratic candidates should focus on job and health care issues where they have the advantage.

In addition, Dean didn’t look presidential to many voters, he was blunt and many thought he was rude. Whenever he was criticized by the mainstream media and by his fellow candidates, his campaign jumped to send urgent emails to his supporters to donate money, without recognizing that their campaign lacked a clear message, or the fact that the criticisms might have been true.

Definitely, Dean energized many Democratic voters with his sharp message against President Bush and he demonstrated the ability of Internet to gather thousands of people and raise money but these accomplishments were not enough to win. Despite being more popular, Dean failed to build a strong field campaign, and had difficulty persuading voters outside his base. John Kerry focused on building a massive, and experienced ground campaign in Iowa and New Hampshire. Plus, Kerry came across as the candidate who could win the general election, and that was a critical concern for primary voters.

Despite all the hype and the massive lead in pre-primary polls, Dean lost. His campaign focused too much on technology and media (especially free media) and not enough on substance and the traditional mechanics of a campaign. At the end of the day, Dean was a flawed candidate running a flawed campaign, and no amount of Internet buzz could change that.

Today, people are attributing too much on technology and not enough to substance or message. Again, Obama is winning because of his narrative and his message that is resonating with voters–not because of the Internet but with the help of the Internet, he is managing to reach as many voters as possible. Small online donations have been able to gather millions of dollars. But, he has also focused on the traditional aspects of field operations. All these are components of good campaign.

Yet, polls are close and we don’t know who will win. It is interesting to live this historical election. An African American is running against a white candidate in a time the US faces its worst economic crisis in generations, two wars in the Middle East, a bad image in the world, and the online role in politics.