The point is, I don’t think the fact that the democratization of knowledge and fundraising via cyberspace has been accompanied by a rise in “authentic” candidates is accidental. Just as television probably put an end to oratory of the type Dirksen was utilizing, so too the Internet has put an end to the reserved, patrician politician. The Internet has also created a new donor class, and like every donor class, they expect something in return. In this case, it is a feeling that the candidate “is one of us.” So voters expect candidates to dance with Ellen, communicate over iPhones, and interview with GloZell Green.

At the same time, the Internet makes it easier to ferret out inauthenticity among candidates. Consider: FDR used to campaign in the South by referring to Reconstruction as the darkest time in the country’s history, before wooing the black vote in the North. In an era where candidates are followed around by YouTube videographers, this would not fly. Instead, when Hillary Clinton puts on a southern accent, it is instantly broadcast around the country.

This is, in my view, to the good. But there is another factor at work: The wreckage of the Great Recession, and the widening gap between elite experience and what we might call “everyday experience.” One manifestation of this is economic. This is hardly a novel thought, but the recovery that has followed the collapse, to the extent that there has been any recovery, has not been felt evenly from top to bottom. It has been concentrated, not just within the top 1 percent, but among the urban, college-educated class in general.