Two words: Howard Dean.
Everyone is going nuts over Ron Paul raising $6 million over the Internet. Based on this they are now pegging him as a viable candidate. Sorry, but no. They thought the same thing about Howard Dean and his campaign went belly-up faster than a county fair goldfish.
Dean and his campaign manager, Joe Trippi, revolutionized Internet campaigning. They were the first to use blogs and Internet donations to raise money, which they did in abundance. However Dean’s campaign proved one indisputable fact about online campaigning: Internet support does not translate into votes.
People think that Dean’s campaign went downhill after his “scream heard around the world.” This is wrong, his campaign was doomed long before that. He was relying too much on his online support. Here’s the thing, people that sit around on the Internet all day for the most part, aren’t exactly the quickest to get up and go cast a vote. The assumption is that if you gave money online, you did your part. Let the rest of the supporters handle the voting part. This is why raising a lot of money doesn’t equate to real support and this is why Ron Paul raising $6 million does not mean he has a good chance of winning the Republican nomination. It just means his main support base is online and will most likely not get off of their butts when it is time to cast a primary vote.
So let’s stop pretending Paul has a chance, despite what the ‘Ron Paul Revolution’ will have you believe.
I don’t think Paul has a chance either, but I wouldn’t be so sure that internet users are indolent voters. I suspect that if someone’s interested enough to make a contribution, they’re probably interested enough to get off their ass to vote – even in a primary. That may especially be the case (or more so than in Dean’s case, maybe) of the libertarian types that Paul attracts.
I just don’t think he has enough party machinery behind him – or enough Republicans willing to jump on his platform.