How to make a political scientist cringe:
A bipartisan group of prominent political strategists on Tuesday announced an Internet information venture designed to interact with America's opinion leaders and serve as an antidote to the right-left clash that typifies political discourse on the Web.
The site, called Hotsoup.com, will debut in October and will be edited by Ron Fournier, former chief political writer for The Associated Press.
Hotsoup is the brainchild of some of the best-known practitioners of partisan politics in Washington, including Matthew Dowd, chief strategist for the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2004, and Joe Lockhart, former White House press secretary under President Clinton and a senior adviser to Democratic Sen. John Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign...
"We all share the belief that partisanship is largely driven by a debate that lacks information and lacks context, and we think this community can provide both of those things," Lockhart said.
From a marketing perspective, it's unclear why anyone would go to this site. There are many others like it out there already, and they uniformly suck. And from a behavioral perspective, the idea that partisanship is "largely driven by a debate that lacks information and lacks context" is stunningly ill-informed. There's plenty of information and context out there. Most people just choose not to get it.
I would write more, but Matthew Yglesias hit the important points yesterday:
[I]t always strikes me as remarkable that nobody ever seems to wonder if there might be actual structural reasons for the rise in political polarization that can't be overcome through a website. When you think about it, after all, polarization is the default state of a political system organized around zero-sum competition between two parties. America used to be less polarized because it used to have the functional equivalent of a multiparty system, thanks to the existence of racial segregation in the South. So should we bring back segregation in order to open up more possibilities for cross-cutting coalition politics? That seems like a bad idea. Should we amend the Constitution to create a parliamentary system with proportional representation? I actually think that would be a good idea in many ways, but obviously it's wildly impractical. So what are you going to do? Nothing, it seems.
"So what are we going to do?" The solution is to have instant run-off elections, or something similar. Centrist politicians would not have to worry about appealing to the extremes, because they know they will be the second or third choice of those voters.
Posted by: Richard Weaver | July 17, 2006 at 03:06 PM
How about instead of simple majority, we begin a 2/3 majority, much like Congress's need for constitutional amendments.
Posted by: Jake P | October 08, 2006 at 02:23 AM
Although touted as a "fresh" alternative voice to politics as usual, Hotsoup appears to be anything but. It looks like nothing more than a blog for unemployed former political insiders from past dynasties. Donna Brazile?? Mary Matalin?? Scott McClellan?? Please!!! Let's dig up Jimmy Carter, Nancy Reagan, Monica Lewinsky, and Slick Willie!!
I guess these guys just miss the good ol' glory days, basking in the media spotlight, spewing tired opinions to a nation that has long since hit the delete button. Do they really think anyone is listening to their spin, sadly discredited by recent events? If so, they should fire themselves and their pollsters and read the Wall St. Journal article that confirms what we already know: most Americans--conservative, liberal, independent, blue state, red state, zebra stripe/polka dot state, or whatever--are sick and tired of the status quo, corrupt, sleazy, spineless politicians (and their staffers) of both parties. (Do we even have two parties?) This crowd offers nothing new, just the same old distortions from people who, contrary to their spin, are pimps to the PACs and big corporations/firms (their future employers once voters kick them out of office). While in office, they loot the treasury, line their pockets, and dodge responsibility for tackling serious issues, like the Iraq war, the deficit, global famine, environmental protection, or genocide in Darfur.
How about a real independent, grassroots blog, featuring average americans' opinions on "hot topics"?
Posted by: Marie in Texas | October 20, 2006 at 10:52 AM
I actually like www.rizzleweb.com better, its got a lot more of a novel concept, it allows everyday users to write performance reviews for everyday politicians, I hear they plan to estabellish a PAC, and donate money to the top rated politicians.
Posted by: rosie | October 31, 2006 at 01:49 AM
What bugs me is this. After years of hard working folks like those at dailykos, firedog lake, bartcop and many others, the netroots blogs have become important and effective. Now some suit and tie corporate type think they can just start a highly financed, highly promoted site and steal the show. I think and hope they will fail.
Posted by: don reynolds | November 01, 2006 at 07:35 PM