Ted Cruz, like FDR with the radio, uses Twitter to spread populist politics
As much as I would like to share my opinion on new smartphones, self-driving cars, the “Internet of Things” or any number of other topics on mobility, I’m afraid I must instead offer my insight into the sad and self-loathing world of mobile devices and politics.
When Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) announced his candidacy for the highest office in the land last week, there were various reactions across the nation. The traditional media went into panic/celebration based on their political affiliation. Facebook burst into flames via a swarm of post/repost debates and friend/un-friendings, and within the beltway bubble dedicated fundraisers from both sides popped champagne corks while political advisers crawled under their beds.
My own reaction I shall keep to myself. However, when thumbing through a recent issue of The Economist, a British news magazine that always manages to insert just enough biting sarcasm to make even the dullest article interesting, I noted it had made a very pithy and accurate observation about Mr. Cruz’s tenure in the Senate. The writer noted that Cruz “has neither proposed substantial legislation nor championed any policy that cannot be conveyed in 140 characters.”
This is an accurate and true observation. Yet, despite his lack of serious experience and any meaningful legislative achievement, coupled with an innate ability to upset everyone in D.C., Cruz appeals to a great mass of people. Why is that?
From my observation, Cruz is not the first, but certainly one of the most successful, political populists to use social media as a means to appeal directly to the voters.
American populism has a long and often interesting history. William Jennings Bryan, the unsuccessful Gilded Age contender for the presidency, was the first man to campaign for office in person. At the time it was considered vulgar by the political establishment. Bryan lost twice, in fact, but many of his ideas remained present throughout the turn of the century.
Franklin Delano Roosevelt was another president who capitalized on populism. His use of radio and his Fireside Chats remain political legend and are studied by school children. Both FDR and Bryan used new technology to appeal to the people and disseminate their message as far as possible.
For Bryan, it was the train, which allowed him to travel to multiple towns and give multiple speeches in a single day. For FDR, it was the radio, which allowed him directly into peoples’ homes. Cruz, like those who came before him, has capitalized on a new technology, specifically Twitter and the mobile Internet.
Yet there is a profound difference between Cruz’s pronouncement and those of Bryan and FDR. While all three seek to distill complex and much-debated policy into simple terms the layman can understand, both Bryan and FDR were very meticulous in the approach by speaking on an issue often for 40 minutes to an hour, explaining to the voter in great detail their view on the matter.
Twitter limits Cruz and other users to 140 characters or less and he excels in projecting populist concepts into that brief snippet of language. Previous tweets of his have read:
“Net Neutrality” is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.
And
Imagine abolishing the IRS!
These tweets are pithy, populist concepts. Many people don’t like the idea of government regulation and no one likes the taxman. Yet there is no end to these statements, no link to a webpage detailing Cruz’s alternative ideas to the IRS and no counterproposal to Obamacare – just the bombastic hollering.
In this day and age, though, that is a winning strategy. Most mobile users, overwhelmed by the information at their fingertips, haven’t the time to read a 30-page document outlining alternative sources of federal revenue following the abolishment of the Internal Revenue Service.
No, far better to keep it short and sweet, which raises the question: As we become more interconnected and our communication becomes more and more truncated, what will future debates and policies look like?
I would go so far as to venture that 2016 will be the year of the 140-character president. To whomever tweets the best shall go the chair, and then, of course, they actually have to rule – which is very different from campaigning.
