Ivanelterrible
12-23-2007, 12:36 AM
I've been wondering about this for awhile. As of right now, even the mass media has acknowledged that Ron Paul supporters are by far the most effective at harnessing the power of the internet and Web 2.0 in general. Indeed, I would argue our only real competition in this department is Huckabee, and while he is gaining some momentum he has nowhere near the influence we do. Which brings me to my question: why?
Why did Ron Paul (or I should say, his supporters) harness the internet so successfully to power the campaign? Is it because Mass Media refused to cover him and our backs were therefore against the wall? Are Ron Paul supporters just naturally more tech savy? Is it because of the general way the campaign was organized from the beginning? Some different reason? Or a combination of all of these to varying degrees?
Was it a mix of factors that is unlikely to be repeated in the future, or are we the first wave of a new way campaigns on the whole are conducted in the future (in which case, it would be a teutonic shift in the entire political reality of the nation).
I'd love to hear some of your thoughts.
Why did Ron Paul (or I should say, his supporters) harness the internet so successfully to power the campaign? Is it because Mass Media refused to cover him and our backs were therefore against the wall? Are Ron Paul supporters just naturally more tech savy? Is it because of the general way the campaign was organized from the beginning? Some different reason? Or a combination of all of these to varying degrees?
Was it a mix of factors that is unlikely to be repeated in the future, or are we the first wave of a new way campaigns on the whole are conducted in the future (in which case, it would be a teutonic shift in the entire political reality of the nation).
I'd love to hear some of your thoughts.