Here is something I didn’t know about Joe Trippi. He considered Dean’s campaign to be a real movement. I thought that was just spin. From what all of his friends and colleagues were saying last night, Joe really considered this campaign to be a movement of greater good.

Well, hell. They were destined to lose then. If the campaign manager isn’t objective about it because he really thinks it is a movement, then they are doomed to failure. I wonder if he started out thinking it was a movement or bought the spin.

I have limited experience in movement politics. Why? Because the very, very few I’ve been involved with didn’t take well to setbacks and because the movements could whip a lot of people into a frenzy, but all the movement got was “frenzy.” Only a few diehards actually did anything.

Come on, conservatives, you know what I’m talking about. Conservatism as a way of living and practicing politics is sustained. But, movement conservatism usually brings out the black helicopter crowd that thinks the U.N. is implanting homing devices in brains.

If that’s what Dean’s campaign truly was about, and not just spin, it was over before it started.

Now, all that said, I really thought it was more than that and apparently I gave credit where credit wasn’t due.

Was it Dean’s fault or Joe Trippi’s fault. My guess is both, but Joe Trippi does deserve some blame. He shouldn’t be heralded as the hero of the campaign who built up an internet powerhouse when that powerhouse couldn’t light up a 60 watt bulb.

I think it is possible to build a campaign around the internet. The hard part is crossing the barrier from dot com to a check mark on a ballot. Moving people from computer to poll takes effort.