I want to share a perspective that will explain a political realty that is not getting enough of our attention. I want you to think of these primary political campaigns as startup ventures rather than candidacies. When Howard Dean shot out early in front of the 2004 Democratic presidential race it seemed like a movement to be sure. When Dean fizzled at the polls, however, the Democratic powers that be realized they had a problem on their hands. Call it the "all fired up and no where to go" syndrome. More after the flip.
The people on the inside of Dean's campaign saw themselves as part of a movement. The money poured in from small donors in a way that hadn't happened in a long time. The Internet was used to organize, communicate and raise money in real-time reaction to the twists and turns of the primary race. It was a first for many things not a few of which where technological.
Essentially, Howard Dean created the fastest growing political startup in recent memory. He had a product and funding and it looked like he was going to claim the market. The "early adopters" and "developers" were looking like an insurmountable force. But the market rejected the product. However, the startup, the funding and the supporters were still there and they weren't going away.
Political campaigns have artificial restrictions (elections) that the "real world" doesn't. Howard Dean's failure would would be the real world equivalent of the AltaVista search engine falling in market share to Yahoo and saying, "well, that's it. It is getting close to November and no one can use AltaVista anymore now that it is in second or third place." In the political world, however, that is exactly what happens. Elections have consequences.
In the case of Dean, however, we need to draw on another comparison. Even though Dean failed at the polls, there was still an organization and a movement. It was like having a bunch of Java software developers being told that "Java lost the desktop software election and everyone needs to go back to using C++". It wasn't going to happen to people who hated C++ and it wasn't going to happen to people who hated politics as usual.
In the end we know that the startup, Howard Dean, did a reverse buyout of the old entrenched organization, the DNC. The DNC bought Howard Dean only in the sense that Apple bought NeXT and Steve Jobs. We got the 50 state strategy and the funding of representative races in slightly less competitive districts. We got a DNC that continues to focus on developers and early adopters. The DNC was remade in Howard Dean's image.
Now, consider that Barack Obama's political startup is about 50 times more successful than Howard Dean's. Even if he doesn't get the nomination or the presidency, just like Dean, Obama isn't going anywhere. We are stuck with him and he will lead this party for years to come.
Hillary, a woman who's first name is Hillary, can be compared with some dot com bubble company that no one even remembers. "Hey, this is going to be huge. Yeah, these three former Microsoft VPs are behind this. Oh, sure they've burned through their first round of funding and their sales are in the toilet, but if we only hang in there a little longer, things will turn around."
Hillary's organization is broke and the early adopters are leaving in droves. When the election is over, unless she wins, her organization is over. Obama doesn't have the same problem.