I think the 2008 election was an interesting year for political observers, and though both parties had difficulties, the Democrats ended up unifying and creating a stronger coalition than the Republican party. At the beginning of the campaign, or during the so-called “invisible primaries”, the elites of both major parties were not very successful in unifying behind one candidate. There was intense inter-party competition between both camps, and it was not clear who the eventual nominees were going to be until fairly late in the race. Hillary seemed to be the front runner at the beginning of the campaign, and it seemed that she was endorsed by a good deal of Democrats, possibly different smaller factions, and even supported by the African American community. However, I just don’t think people had enough confidence/lost confidence in her ability to lead as the campaign went on. Obama was a better speaker with more charisma, and after he earned more confidence from the Democratic party as well as the American public, he was able to take control of the nomination. The Democrats definitely showed much more unity as a party during the 2008 election. And even though Obama was candidate-centered at the beginning of the race (he lacked a strong backing from his party), the Democrats managed to unite and rally around him, and put all of their political resources toward the campaign.

For the Republicans, 2008 seems to have been an “abnormal” election year. Although the party elites seemed to have a favorite in Fred Thompson during the invisible primary, he just wasn’t effective on the campaign trail. The rest of the Republican prospects had more candidate-centered campaigns than party centered, as they represented different factions of the party. At one point it even looked like Huckabee might have had a chance of winning the ticket, even though he did not get along with important factions in the party. Even after McCain won the Republican endorsement and chose Palin to balance out the ticket for conservatives, the Republican party was not unified in it’s support, as some prominent Republicans even endorsed Obama as their choice for President.

Technological advances have affected candidate-party relations as it’s given voters access to much more information. They are not only bombarded with ads that are approved and designed by the party or candidate, but they can also seek out more information to attempt to figure out what’s really true, and who they want to vote for. Even if the party elites have a preferred candidate, they are not guaranteed to be approved by the public. However, technology gives us instant information, and in the 2008 campaign we saw every minute detail discussed on TV and online, played over and over. Small incidents can break a campaign, so there will be some level of candidate-centeredness in every campaign. This is the same for Congressional elections, although they don’t get the same amount of attention as Presidential elections, I think technology could change their importance to many people if they are really motivated to vote and participate. This is where the party and technology can really work together, as the whole party network can branch out, and create “hubs” as the Teachout article talked about. Party members can use their individual resources to promote the favored candidate, and technology makes this quicker and easier than ever. On Obama’s website, there is a large link right at the top of the page where you can find local events in your area to get involved with. This is one of the tactics recommended by Teachout.