Social networks are constantly in flux between balanced and unbalanced states. At the most basic level, a social network involves three individuals (or nodes) and the positive/negative relationships between them. The friend of my friend is my friend; the friend of my enemy is my enemy; the enemy of my enemy is my friend. These three clauses basically describe the balancing act that occurs within a triadic network. This being election year, the velocity at which this balancing of networks is occurring is at a fever pitch.

The specific example I’d like to talk about is the social triad of Ann Coulter, Senator John McCain, and Senator Hilary Clinton. We have a highly controversial conservative commentator, a candidate for the Republican nominee criticized by Coulter for not being conservative enough, and a female candidate for the Democratic nomination who is loved as much as she is hated. Although “enemy” might be too strong a word, all three individuals are connected by negative edges. This is not what would be considered a balanced network and some tinkering had to occur. As predicted by the idea of structural balance, one of the nodes “switched”. Ann Coulter announced that if McCain won the candidacy for the GOP, that she would bat for the other team and support Clinton.

The entire political process is this sort of balancing of triads. Candidates for their party’s nomination drop out and then back one of the remaining candidates, as Fred Thompson did for McCain. So what starts out as a playing field of several competing nodes and their supporters turns into two major components that end up fighting for the nomination of their party. Then the two components merge once the nominee is selected and competes with the other party’s nominee. Of course this is a very basic and abstract summarization of the political process, but it is interesting to see glimpses of our lectures within everyday life.