IStock Photo 8341322 © Dan Moore

As the punditry furiously analyzes every nuance of President Barack Obama’s first State of the Union Address, it’s worth recalling how Obama got here: his campaign is credited with having run the most prolific fundraising operation in the history of politics, raising an epic $745 million.

But maybe some of the glory should go to a 27-year-old bespectacled political techie named Joe Rospars. As leader of what the Washington Post dubbed “Triple O”—Obama’s 3-person new media team—Rospars decided that the old fundraising model, where candidates relied on a few large campaign donors, was unfit for a generation connected by iPhones® and BlackBerrys®. Instead, he created my.barackobama.com, where supporters could interact with each other—and, most importantly, make small donations. By the end of the campaign, 3 million people had donated; $254 million came from donors who gave under $200. The model for one major avenue of political activism had been completely re-imagined.

Various forms of political expression have long held appeal for Americans. 1 in 2.44 adults 26 or older believes it is his or her responsibility to get involved and improve society; for Americans 15-25, the odds are 1 in 2.56. But giving money to politicians is just one way. 1 in 3.85 adults 26 or older will sign a paper petition in a year, and 1 in 2.63 will boycott something. Meanwhile, many forms of activism traditionally reserved for political elites have become much more accessible. With the advent of social networking and complex voter contact systems, almost anybody can become a political activist. By the end of his campaign, Obama had more than 750,000 volunteers, a staggering number that dwarfed past efforts to motivate supporters.

Some experts believe that as politics becomes more accessible, and candidates more interesting, Obama’s experience will become the norm. “The great unanswered question is whether the surge of enthusiasm for Obama was an aberration or a sign of things to come,” said Dan Schnur, who served as communications director for former California governor Pete Wilson and for John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign. When it comes to campaign donations, at least, the trends seem to be pointing up: in 2004, the presidential candidates raised $880 million dollars; in 2008, that number ballooned to a whopping $1.75 billion. Nearly all of that came from individuals.

But perhaps the most visible change in how Americans express themselves politically is how they interact with their elected leaders. When Democrats tried to rush a health care bill through Congress last summer, opponents rallied at town hall meetings in a spree of expression not seen in decades. “The last time there was a level of populist sentiment like we’re seeing now was back in the early 1990s,” said Schnur, who noted that the opposition is often disproportionately effective at rallying supporters. “And it’s unlikely that the public anger had peaked.” The recent election of Republican Scott Brown to Ted Kennedy’s former Senate seat is a case in point.

The same can be said for calls to lawmakers. 1 in 4.55 adults 26 or older will contact a public official each year, and some congressmen have found themselves targets. When I worked at Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank’s office last spring, the powerful representative received hundreds of calls each day from people frustrated with his role in the financial crisis—a sharp spike from past years. We’re wired to express ourselves in perceived times of crisis, it seems, and our rich history of political expression dates back to before President Lincoln. Abe once famously sent a letter to Horace Greeley’s New York Tribune with a clarion pledge that “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union.” But Lincoln would be disappointed to hear that the dismal state of newspapers and magazines has extended into the political arena: just 1 in 9.09 adults 26 and older will contact print media each year, one of the only declining indicators of political expression.

Incidentally, those still bucking the activism trend might want to change their apathetic ways. One study shows that those engaging in political expression are happier and more fulfilled.