Paul exposes 'over-hype' of Internet's place in politics

Near-fanatical support on the Internet has translated into a fundraising and publicity boom for GOP presidential contender Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) -- but can the libertarian-leaning Republican parlay his online celebrity status into votes?

Despite Paul's record one-day $4 million fundraising haul and a spate of recent media attention, the congressman's online triumphs won't mean much when real world primary ballots are tallied, according to a column in Roll Call by political insider Stuart Rothenberg.

"Single-handedly, the quirky libertarian Republican from Texas has unintentionally exposed the over-hype that accompanies much of the talk about politics and the Internet," Rothenberg writes. "Paul has been doing well in post-debate call-ins and Internet 'polls' for months, and his Web site has been scoring more hits than a bong at a Grateful Dead concert...But big-sounding numbers can be deceiving, and politics is more about breadth of support than depth. Ultimately, elections are about winning votes, not Web visitors or even campaign dollars."

Like many beltway political pundits, Rothenberg, the 59-year-old publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report, is dismissive of Paul's presidential prospects. He notes that while Paul's fundraising muscle has been impressive, it still doesn't stack up with top tier candidates from either party.

"Yes, $4 million is a lot of money to raise in a single day," he concedes. "But it pales in comparison to the overall fundraising of Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who didn’t need a one-day fundraising event to get media attention."



more at link: http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Coumnist_Paul_exposes_overhype_of_internets_1126.html

that's some fine writing there, Lou

I'm not a Ron Paul supporter at all. That being said, why is it that if someone is anti-war they are immediately branded hippies by the establishment press?

lol

The number 1 reason (still) given in exit polls for why a voter voted the way he or she did:
"I thought they were going to win."
This is the insurmountable hurdle that candidates such as Paul and Kucinich are faced with.

get their messages out to a lot more people than any other method has done in the past. I know if I think about myself alone, even thouh I've always listened to all the televised speeches, debates, and interviews, none of them are long enough to really answer all the questions. I know I can get MOST answers from the candidate's web site, and I think that's GREAT!

Then there's the "broad impact" of YouTube! Anyone who doesn't think THAT has a strong & broad effect on votes needs to ask Mcaca Allen about it!

:rofl:

That he does.

or undervalue it. Internet support doesn't necessarily translate into real world support, particularly not when the stakes are so high, but the internet is a valuable tool for citizen oversight of the government.