Is it possible that we are seeing the demise of 30-second, soundbyte, warm-n-fuzzy, commercialized campaigning thanks to the internet? I'm not sure, but I like the thoughts Dick Morris lays out here:

Dean's use of the Internet to raise money, generate support and enthuse the party's activists will long be remembered as a signpost along the transition from the television to the Internet era of American politics.... With Americans mesmerized by television, the media blitz and the glitzy 30-second ad carried the day....

The larger message of the Dean candidacy is that the era of TV-dominated politics is coming to a close after 30 years. With dwindling audiences and an increasingly sophisticated electorate, the 30-second ad and the seven-second soundbite are losing their power to control the political dialogue. Taking their place is grassroots organizing, made possible by the Internet, in which candidates grow from the outside, mobilizing on the hustings, guerrilla style, before they take their act to the center stage of national politics.

But the habits that underlay this media domination of politics has ebbed. The top prime-time TV shows now draw 10-15 million households where once they enthralled more than 30 million at a shot. National television news no longer reaches 60 million homes every night, but has to settle for 20 million instead. The low costs of Internet campaigning, and the viral way in which it spreads by word of mouth and person-to-person contact, is offering an alternative to top-driven, capital-intensive TV campaigning.

In sector after sector of American life, we are throwing off intermediaries. We use the Internet to buy cars, book travel, do banking and sometimes even to kindle romance. We are now throwing off the political intermediaries and using it to pick a president.