“We must act,” President Obama declared in his inaugural address. A critical part of his strategy is harnessing the energy and enthusiasm of his campaign supporters to promote his legislative agenda.

Second terms are often marked by disappointment and frustration, as presidential vigor is sapped by the effects of the lame-duck flu. (There’s no vaccine against it.) And Obama has a special problem: a House of Representatives dominated by hard-core conservative Republicans who have declared holy war against the president.

But the White House aims to marginalize those opponents by generating public support for Obama’s proposals and forcing lawmakers to respond to their constituents. The president was speaking about gun laws — but could have been addressing his entire legislative agenda — when he said recently: “I tell you, the only way we can change is if the American people demand it.” Obama’s close adviser Robert Gibbs framed the strategy this way on MSNBC: “The president has the most exciting campaign apparatus ever built. It’s time to turn that loose.”

Team Obama has taken that apparatus, with its huge database and network of volunteers, and created a new entity, Organizing for Action. It’s established under the same section of the tax code that Republicans used to raise vast sums of corporate money during the last campaign. Since Democrats denounced that whole concept, there’s a whiff of hypocrisy here. But all smart politicians copy their opponents’ best ideas, and Gibbs is right that Obama’s campaign organization was a critical part of his victory. So keeping it alive is a shrewd move.

That campaign was inspired by Facebook and is based on the same essential insight: People hunger for relationships, for connections, for a sense of belonging and purpose. Facebook enables you to “like” or “friend” someone or something, to post a photo, to send a message or to join a group, and the Obama campaign did exactly the same thing. Volunteers could submit ideas, hold meetings, canvass neighbors, transmit videos, donate money.

That process of participation changed the way supporters thought of themselves and their role in politics. They were transformed from a passive to an active mode. They acquired a vital stake in the election’s outcome, and that’s what Team Obama is trying to duplicate. They want supporters to take an ownership share in the president’s legislative agenda.