Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 21
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    McNeal, Ramona and Bryan, Lisa Dotterweich 2015. Encyclopedia of Mobile Phone Behavior.


    Heemsbergen, Luke Justin and Lindgren, Simon 2014. The power of precision air strikes and social media feeds in the 2012 Israel–Hamas conflict: ‘targeting transparency’. Australian Journal of International Affairs, Vol. 68, Issue. 5, p. 569.


    Baxter, Graeme Marcella, Rita Chapman, Denise and Fraser, Alan 2013. Voters' information behaviour when using political actors' web sites during the 2011 Scottish Parliament election campaign. Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 65, Issue. 5, p. 515.


    Karlsen, Rune 2013. Obama's Online Success and European Party Organizations: Adoption and Adaptation of U.S. Online Practices in the Norwegian Labor Party. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vol. 10, Issue. 2, p. 158.


    Schulzke, Marcus 2013. Serving in the Virtual Army: Military Games and the Civil-Military Divide. Journal of Applied Security Research, Vol. 8, Issue. 2, p. 246.


    Turner, Eric 2013. TheGrilliniin Italy: New Horizons for Internet-based Mobilization and Participation. Social Movement Studies, Vol. 12, Issue. 2, p. 214.


    Chambers, Barbara J. and Bichard, Shannon L. 2012. Public Opinion on YouTube. International Journal of E-Politics, Vol. 3, Issue. 2, p. 1.


    Farrell, Henry 2012. The Consequences of the Internet for Politics. Annual Review of Political Science, Vol. 15, Issue. 1, p. 35.


    Gibson, Rachel 2012. From Brochureware to ‘MyBo’: An Overview of Online Elections and Campaigning. Politics, Vol. 32, Issue. 2, p. 77.


    Baxter, Graeme Marcella, Rita and Varfis, Evaggelos 2011. The use of the internet by political parties and candidates in Scotland during the 2010 UK general election campaign. Aslib Proceedings, Vol. 63, Issue. 5, p. 464.


    Garcia-Castañon, Marcela Rank, Alison D. and Barreto, Matt A. 2011. Plugged In or Tuned Out? Youth, Race, and Internet Usage in the 2008 Election. Journal of Political Marketing, Vol. 10, Issue. 1-2, p. 115.


    Gibson, Rachel K. and McAllister, Ian 2011. Do Online Election Campaigns Win Votes? The 2007 Australian “YouTube” Election. Political Communication, Vol. 28, Issue. 2, p. 227.


    CHAMBERLAIN, ADAM 2010. An Inside-Outsider or an Outside-Insider? The Republican Primary Campaign of Ron Paul from a Third-Party Perspective. Politics & Policy, Vol. 38, Issue. 1, p. 97.


    Karlsen, Rune 2010. Online and Undecided: Voters and the Internet in the Contemporary Norwegian Election Campaign. Scandinavian Political Studies, Vol. 33, Issue. 1, p. 28.


    Thackeray, Rosemary and Hunter, MaryAnne 2010. Empowering Youth: Use of Technology in Advocacy to Affect Social Change. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 15, Issue. 4, p. 575.


    Gibson, Rachel and Ward, Stephen 2009. PARTIES IN THE DIGITAL AGE—A REVIEW ARTICLE. Representation, Vol. 45, Issue. 1, p. 87.


    Gibson, Rachel K. 2009. NEW MEDIA AND THE REVITALISATION OF POLITICS. Representation, Vol. 45, Issue. 3, p. 289.


    Karlsen, Rune 2009. Campaign Communication and the Internet: Party Strategy in the 2005 Norwegian Election Campaign. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, Vol. 19, Issue. 2, p. 183.


    Mckenna, Laura 2009. Netroots Rising: How a Citizen Army of Bloggers and Online Activists Is Changing American Politics, by Lowell Feld and Nate Wilcox. Political Communication, Vol. 26, Issue. 2, p. 242.


    Lev-On, Azi and Hardin, Russell 2008. Internet-Based Collaborations and Their Political Significance. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, Vol. 4, Issue. 2, p. 5.


    ×

The Real Lessons of Howard Dean: Reflections on the First Digital Campaign

  • Matthew Hindman (a1)
  • DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1537592705050115
  • Published online: 01 March 2005
Abstract

Howard Dean's presidential bid was notable for many things, including the mixed reaction it drew from political scientists. Many scholars found Dean's ultimate failure predictable. Longstanding political science wisdom suggests several explanations for Dean's defeat: the central issue of electability, which seemed to weigh heavily against his campaign; the fact that primary voters are more moderate than party activists; the well-documented difficulty of regaining lost momentum. Less systematic factors—such as numerous verbal gaffes and one infamous scream—surely contributed as well.Matthew Hindman is an assistant professor of political science at Arizona State University (matthew.hindman@asu.edu). This research was supported by the National Center for Digital Government, with funding from the National Science Foundation under grant no. 0131923. The author thanks Jennifer Hochschild, Larry Bartels, Chris Karpowitz, Gabriel Lenz, David Lazer, Alan Abramowitz, James McCann, and the three anonymous reviewers for their contributions.

Copyright
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Perspectives on Politics
  • ISSN: 1537-5927
  • EISSN: 1541-0986
  • URL: /core/journals/perspectives-on-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×