I remember seeing that faux motivational poster during the campaign.

I almost forgot to mention that it looks like you're missing a few zeroes there....

José,
Lindsay works on projects dealing with health (cancer) e-advocacy where the MP (member o' Parliament) e-mail addresses are ready-to-go after you enter in your post code.

I'm just waiting for the day when we all can buy the government virtual bling or a drink on Facebook for a buck.

In my limited experience with online activism, there is a curve when it comes to getting people to take action and building momentum. Feedback mechanisms probably encourage people to take action (e.g. setting goals of x thousand people, or a call/hit counter). The diehards in a group are pretty much a given - getting the more ordinary members to take action can be the difference between a spike of diehard responses and gaining momentum as more and more ordinary members participate.

A couple of challenges come to mind. If you send out too many emails too often people will probably become increasingly less likely to respond. "I did my part" or "This isn't working or "Not that again - how desperate are these people?" Setting incremental goals or finding other ways to show participants that their contribution is "making a difference" or "counts for something" helps. (The flip side is that mobilization may lose steam if too many say "I already did my part" after the first few goals.)

Also, the Obama 08 and MoveOn.org campaigns we looked at in class didn't just amass members and contact information, but were very tactical about bringing pressure on areas where it was most effective. While a general expression of support for the budget is no doubt helpful, it would probably be even more effective to assess how many votes the budget needs in each chamber, how votes it's likely to receive, and use this to develop a more focused strategy for mobilizing supporters. (A geocoded database would be helpful here.)

As we touched on in class today, social movements don't really end as much as they expand/decline/morph. I wonder how involved those 13 million supporters will remain over the next 4 years or so. One of the benefits of communication networks is that all 13 million don't have to be eternally vigilant - they can just mobilize on demand (in theory). However, they need to sustain a certain level of interest/involvement , or people will start ignoring emails.

It's going to be hard to keep everyone motivated and equally as enthusiastic as they were throughout Obama's campaign. Not that it can't be done, but a presidential candidacy is easier to be enthusiastic about than passing a 3.55 trillion dollar budget plan. It's just as easy as being active though. This new tool of Obama's is very exciting, and makes it that much easier for us to be involved. Unfortunately Obama has plenty of opposition not just in the Republican party, but the Democratic party as well. Although he may rally up much support from the average citizen with this new opportunity, he will still have much to deal with in congress itself. However, we may not have many other great options. Obama had developed this system during his candidacy and many people (especially those who followed Bush), have no new ideas. But overall, this concept is a great way for Obama to give more power to the people, and encourage them to be active.

We Americans have mastered the art of quick memory when it comes to the entertainment industry – can you believe Gwyneth Paltrow named her baby after a fruit? Wasn’t Kate Winslet’s dress at last year’s Oscars amazing? Are Tom and Katie really doing ok? When it comes to politics and social history and progression, we fall ill to the ailment of “I beg your pardon?” Is this a question of I can’t, or I am just not interested? If you’re like me, the term “politician” conjures up something like: overpaid, over-polished unqualified, ignorant, used-car salesman.
Barack Obama may have narrowly escaped the particular process in which citizens have tended to mold all members of government. First off, Obama had several things going for him at the beginning of his campaign that immediately put him in the driver’s seat of the Washington playing field: he was a youthful newcomer, he was a beautiful orator and he was interested in engaging all of the American public. When you have views strongly opposite of a current failing Bush administration, how can you lose? Obama won his campaign by being proactive with the utilization of “freelance” volunteers and mass media. Coming down to the level of the public with internet organization earned him twice as many votes as the somewhat stodgy McCain campaign.
The question of whether the email database is successful is no longer about Obama. It doesn’t matter if his approval rating is 8% or 80%. People are not proactive enough to remain interested in politics, even with the promised “inside scoop.” With the economy continues to dive south and the value of the dollar gets more miniscule by the day, attention spans reach their limit. Focus will wander more and more the worse our conditions become. What you care about on Monday becomes irrelevant by the new crisis of Friday. This time last year the issue on everybody’s minds was how they were going to put gas into their cars. Prior to that, it was global warming and the alternative energy craze. While subprime mortgage lending and collapsing bank infrastructures were still problems, they weren’t immediate enough to garner the spot of Interest #1. The president claims tough times are ahead, but the nation will still persevere. Until there is no bailout alternative, and as long as our president that takes time to fill out his NCAA brackets on public television, we should be moving on the right track. Until everything falls apart at the exact same time, people will put space between themselves and the government, convincing themselves that the end hasn’t come quite yet.

Do people really know why they love Obama or do they love him because of the hype during the campaign and election? People love Obama and think he's awesome but do they really know what he's about? The manner in which his campaign used the internet is amazing because millions more than previous elections turned out not only to vote but to be active members of his campaign. Do they really agree with his policy or were they infatuated with his image and marketability? I believe that if the campaign was able to lead people to elect Obama, if he stands behind this massive budget proposal people will follow him. The idea that Obama is endorsing it and the way in which he will sell it will make people think that it's the best way to go.

I think it's one thing to get people excited and committed about getting a charismatic and historic president elected, but something totally different when it comes to "doing his work." I mean a lot of people thought that it was over when they elected Obama and now it continues. People are going to get tired of this and I think that there will be a decline in this kind of participation. However, if there is ever a time for it to work, it's now. Obama is such a strong and influential leader that people will follow his examples and ideas. So in my opinion, it will work as long as his image of "awesomeness" is sustained.

Barack Obama had something special from the eve of his campaign. Actually he had me captivated and interested since his first appearance on Oprah in 2006/2007. His oral communication skills are superb, his charisma is just astonishing and I believe is one of the reasons he won. His internet base was (is) strong however he needs to continue to increase his base, in order to maintain his support (and approval ratings). The use of the internet if it is as strong of an influence will not just amplify his current support (Obama-maniacs) but still engage and captivate ex. Clinton and others who weren't initially supportive of Obama. This will be the a test of both the internet's capability to change politics and whether Obama's win was just "lightning in a bottle" and will possible not occur once again.
I would not label myself as an activist, I am passionate about certain subjects and I participate in several online activist sites. I find that the internet amplifies my ability to keep up with data, and law changes from all over the country. I am more able to keep up but I do not feel as though the internet changes my passions, it would make it easier but I am admitting to polarizing myself to basically three areas of interests: endangered species/habitats, environmental policy, and injustice (under served communities). I am passionate about these issues, I do care for other issues (e.g., prop 8) but I do not go out of my way to become a "internet activist" for these issues. Although, I feel they are extremely important. Back to Obama, I feel that he would need to extend his agenda and encompass and engulf more supporters other than those who elected him. He needs to inject himself in the lives of those who are skeptical or on the border. I do not doubt his ability to captivate but I am curious if the people will become immune to his charisma and whether the Obama-mania will dwindle in the next year or so.

Obama's campaign team did an amazing job at getting people to feel like they are doing something good for the campaign as a whole, and who wouldn't be on top of the world if they felt like they were helping change the world and were part of something historical? But that's just it, and we went over this in class; it was something historical, so we felt motivated and were willing to add our e-mails to twenty lists. I don't see something like this happening again, and as Obama now inundates our e-mail boxes with pleas to appeal to our senators and, later on, for campaign funds many may see the costs of the Internet's instant gratification. And, as more and more people use the internet and it consumes more of the world we may face a situation wherein those people may not feel like they are contributing anything. People may begin to realize that no one cares about their odd, rambling blog post or how many people they talked to about Obama's campaign.

I think this strategy will work because the Obama campaign was very good at energizing all of their members from the working class to the wealthy. All of his members may not help but if he is able to get 10% to 30% of his following to urge their congresspeople to support the president then that increases pressure on those elected officials. Obama has a huge donor base so even if a small percentage of that base were to lobby on behalf of the President's budget it will be more than most congress people would expect and they would have to do something about it to make their constituents happy

My first instinct was to be concerned about the amount of political capital that this will use up. I think the Obama presidency realizes it's at a point where they're able to implement a lot of their agenda and programs, however much of this political will will be eroded as the presidency continues on. This is especially hampered by the economic situation, in which according to 538, the Obama admin has 2 years to being growing the economy before the public sees it as their doing. There's very little sexiness in seeing a spending bill passed. Not nearly as much as electing a new charismatic leader. So well it work? I guess it depends a lot on how much these grassroots participants can be energized. Maybe they can take a tip from the NRA in energizing their base.

In a campaign an end goal is something everyone can understand. Not only that, it's something almost anyone can do so many feel the obligation to have a level of civic engagement in the process. The Obama Campaign in 2008 was probably the most effective use of this civic power ever in American history and so much of that was made possible by the technology, access and networking power that comes with the internet. My only concern about this being used again in such a short amount of time for something with an end goal that isn't black or white...it's grey. Also people just can't understand everything involved in it.

A presidential campaign is such an easy thing to attach a face to, or a name, or a website. Unfortunately this budget is not that same entity. I admire the administration for trying new techniques to connect citizens to whats going on in DC but i really don't see this picking up steam. Especially because it's all emails right now. I currently get a weekly email from the Obama campaign asking me to pay attention to this, or sign this petition or email this person and to be frank I've given up on it. I don't see how I can have much of a say in this Washington matter and this is nothing as inspiring as a history breaking campaign. I love the idea but don't see much of a future for it in this presidential term....maybe down the road...

As I see it only good can come out of this for the Obama people. You will always have your dedicated group that will go out and do whatever they can to help the party succeeded. This idea comes on the heels of great motivation where the 13 million database of emails still feels like they are doing something to help change the country for the better. This feeling will eventually die down, but for now it is still there. Therefore, when the mass emails are sent out asking them to help again there is no doubt that even half will do anything. But even if Obama’s staff gets just a million people to participate out of the 13 million and sit down with one other person in there community they then have succeeded in gathering 2 million people that has never been a part of this process before. Consequently causing “change” or a sense of civic engagement. So as I see it there time to do something with this database of emails is now, before the momentum dies down.