Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Christopher M. Mascaro
The Johns Hopkins University
Mascaro 2
mobilize individuals and disseminate information dating all the way back to the first elections.
The elections of the Internet age are no different. Candidates are using the Internet in innovative
ways to appeal to voters and raise money. Many of these innovative techniques have permitted
lesser-known candidates to become recognized on the national political scene and challenge the
The most prominent examples of the use of innovative technology in recent Presidential
elections include Howard Dean in 2004 along with Ron Paul and Barack Obama in 2008.
Howard Dean can be considered one of the first candidates to use the Internet successfully on a
national scale to build a personal brand. Ron Paul’s bid for the 2008 Republican nomination
relied on the Internet, because he lacked support among the Republican base. Barack Obama
would have had a near impossible chance at beating Hillary Clinton for the Democratic
nomination had it not been for the existence of the Internet and his innovative new media
strategy1. The use of the Internet and new technology has allowed Presidential candidates to
emerge onto the national political scene and become competitive in Presidential primaries and
general elections.
The paper will begin with a brief discussion of political candidates and mobilization
focusing on the various manners in which candidates mobilize support. Second, a history of the
temporal use of new technologies in Presidential campaigns, starting with print media, through
the development of radio and TV all the way up to the Internet will be presented. Next, a brief
1
In the paper, the terms new media and participatory media relate to the use of blogs, social
networks and other Internet based media that depends on user generated content as opposed to
traditional media outlets where the communication is one-way.
Mascaro 3
history of the use of Internet in political campaigns will be presented. From there, the paper will
explore the Presidential campaigns of 2004 and 2008 and how Howard Dean, Ron Paul and
Barack Obama used the Internet. Finally, Barack Obama’s election to the White House will be
discussed with a focus on how he was more effective than Paul and Dean and what this could
The need for political candidates to mobilize support is fundamental to any successful
election attempt. The manner in which candidates mobilize their supporters and attempt to garner
more support is the subject of widespread academic research. Even though candidates choose to
mobilize supporters in different ways the basics of mobilization are all the same. These basic
principles include candidates going out on the campaign trail to garner name recognition,
delivering their message to the constituents and establishing their stances on policy issues. The
different ways that candidates mobilize support leads to success or failure in the election.
The fact that voting in the United States is a two-stage process often times makes
mobilization even more difficult. The electorate must effectively go to the polls twice, once to
register and then again to vote. One of the issues with registration, especially for new voters is
that it comes during a time when the excitement of the election may not be present (Jackson
1996). In many states, voters must be registered 30 days before election day and at that time
people are then locked into being able or unable to vote on election day3. Therefore, it is
2
Volumes could be written on how Obama used new media to defeat Hillary Clinton and John
McCain, but the focus of this paper will be on how Obama was successful relative to prior
individuals that used new media and new technology of the Internet as a large part of their
campaign.
3
Though it is important to mention that some states are moving away from this registration
model and allowing same day registration and voting, it is not widespread enough to warrant any
general study of the effects of it on a national scale.
Mascaro 4
important for politicians to try to mobilize support well before election day. The long
Democratic primary season of 2008 offered a unique set of circumstances that found many
individuals registering for their state primaries and in turn being registered for the November
One of the biggest questions facing those studying mobilization and voter turnout is
determining who gets mobilized or contacted by the political campaigns. Goldstein and Ridout
argue that those individuals most likely to be contacted by traditional mobilization techniques
such as phone calls or direct mail tend to be those that have voted in the past or are already most
likely to vote (2002). Holbrook and McClurg similarly argue that “partisans” or those strongly
affiliated to a party are the ones most likely to be exposed to campaign information and
mobilization attempts (2005). These strategies may not be the most effective.
A successful campaign is one that is able to translate campaign exposure into votes on
Election Day, but many times these individuals are ones that would have voted with the party
anyway. Therefore, very few new voters are being exposed to campaign information and in turn
are forced to seek information out for themselves. These new voters are the ones that may not be
included in traditional mobilization techniques and often times are the ones that need the
information or encouragement to get out to the polls. Overall, traditional mobilization techniques
are essentially a waste of money on the scale that they are carried out, because they are targeting
those with the least need for the information. This problem has now been solved as new
Technology that is able to reach a large amount of people at once has been used for years in
Presidential Elections and the pioneers of using new technology throughout the years have been
The use of new technology in Presidential elections goes back centuries. The efficiency
of the printing press helped Andrew Jackson form and organize the Democratic Party leading up
to the Presidential election of 1828. Jackson then used the postal service to distribute fliers
detailing his biographical information painting him as a hero in the war of 1812. After his
election, he turned the Postmaster general position into a patronage position and greatly
expanded the reach of the Post Office understanding how important it was for communication
(Ambinder 2008).
Abraham Lincoln also benefited from new technology of the day when transcripts of his
debates with Douglas were reprinted in newspapers that had just become nationally distributed.
The use of the print media helped Lincoln, a physically unattractive individual, gain national
celebrity status (Ambinder 2008). Franklin Delano Roosevelt used his radio “fireside chats” to
appeal directly to the American people and help them form a connection with him. These “chats”
helped FDR garner more support from the American people for the New Deal (Ambinder 2008).
In the middle of the 20th century Estes Kefauver used television to boost his political
prospects and become a household name. In 1950, sensing the growing organized crime problem
facing the United States, the Senate established the Special Committee to Investigate Organized
Tennessee to serve as its chair. The committee traveled to 14 cities in 15 months, broadcasting
the proceedings on television during a time when Americans were first buying them. This
enabled Kefauver to gain name recognition, boosting him to national prominence and allowing
him a bid for the 1952 nomination (United States Senate 1950).
Mascaro 6
The popularity of Senator Kefauver allowed him to defeat President Harry S. Truman in
the New Hampshire primary. Kefauver then went on to win 14 of the 17 primaries, but failed to
win the Democratic nomination, because the nomination in 1952 was mostly decided by the
outcomes of state conventions not primaries, limiting the general public’s influence (Brown
1998). The use of television by Kefauver to broadcast the hearings made him a household name,
turning an unknown freshmen Senator into a national figure. Though much of his momentum
may have been driven by the TV exposure, this case is analogous to what is happening with the
Internet today.
The first major use of the Internet in elections and campaigns began in 1996, when the
Internet first became available to the masses. In 1996, most candidate websites were merely a
virtual campaign brochure with basic information about the candidate and limited information
about their stances on policy issues (Dulio et al. 1999). It was not until the 1998 election cycle
that candidates started to realize the power of the Internet and began to develop strategies to
succeed online.
In 1998, more than two-thirds of candidates for Congressional seats had websites. Of
these websites, more than 70 percent of the candidates used the websites to perform some sort of
fundraising activity. These activities ranged from providing visitors with information on how to
donate to allowing them to make credit card donations on the website (Dulio et al. 1999). The
year of 1998 marked the emergence of the Internet to reach out to Internet users. In 1998, Jesse
Ventura used e-mail to attract supporters for his bid for the Minnesota Governor seat (Napoli
2003). The ability for individuals to donate online did not necessarily illustrate a quick shift to
In the 1998 race for the California Senate Seat, less than 1 percent of all campaign
donations were made online (Dulio et al. 1999). This figure is very limited in contrast to the
hundreds of millions of dollars being raised online today, but illustrated the future of
campaigning on the Internet. Even though most candidates in major elections had a website in
1998, the benefits of having an online presence were not realized because Internet access was not
as ubiquitous as today. As Internet access entered more homes in the early 21st century,
candidates realized the need to develop a more attractive web presence. The elections of 2000
were the first major election cycle where the Internet played a significant role. In 2000,
Republican presidential primary candidate John McCain raised more than $5 million online
(Napoli 2003).
The wide proliferation of the Internet meant that people were turning to the Internet for
political information. During the 1998 and 2000 election seasons a question was posed to
potential voters asking them what they used as their primary media source for election
information. From 1998 to 2000, the amount of respondents indicating that they used newspapers
as their primary source dropped by 14 percent while the number claiming they used the Internet
increased by about the same percentage (Lupia 2003). This statistic made it clear that there was a
shift to the Internet for political information. This phenomenon would be evident in the 2008
election as preliminary reports indicated that 46 percent of Americans used the Internet to get
election news during the primary season (Smith and Rainie 2008).
The use of the Internet in Presidential campaigns was to be expected in the 2004
elections, but the Internet had changed significantly since the previous election. This called for a
shift in strategy from campaigns. Prior campaigns had focused on the use of static web pages, the
equivalent of advertising billboards and small virtual “tip jars” for fundraising. From 2000-2004,
Mascaro 8
the Internet began its transformation from static content to dynamic content and the emergence
Howard Dean is one of the first candidates to harness the power of this emerging
technology, as is evident by his use of the Internet for fundraising and the website meetup.com to
mobilize voters. In January 2003, Howard Dean had less than $200,000 in the bank and only
seven staff members (Anderson 2004). Up to that point, Dean’s political career had been in
Vermont state politics including serving a Governor for nearly a decade. The moment that
catapulted Dean onto the national scene was a speech he gave at the California Democratic
National Convention in 2003. In this speech, Dean questioned and challenged the Democratic
Party for its current state (Dean 2003). This speech helped him find favor with grassroots
organizations and other activists that shared his views; the very individuals that would be his
base.
After the speech, Dean’s support grew and he became the apparent front-runner through
most of the pre-primary season until an unexpected loss in the 2004 Iowa caucus. The fact that
Dean was the apparent front-runner and then lost the first primary is what is most notable. How
could Dean go from being the front-runner to losing? Dean did not commit any serious blunders
to that point; the answer is in how Dean actually mobilized his support4.
Howard Dean became a national figure in American politics, because of the use of the
website meetup.com and blogging. Dean was successful in utilizing meetup.com to help
mobilize voters and translate the mobilization into momentum and fundraising. The purpose of
the website meetup.com is to allow groups of people with similar interests find each other and
4
The “Dean Scream” is outside the scope of the paper, because it happened as a result of his loss
in Iowa and not in the time leading up to it.
Mascaro 9
then “meetup” offline. Once they “meetup” the individuals then talk about the interest or partake
in some activity. Dean included a link on his website to meetup.com and encouraged people to
join and find local groups to attend (Sosnik 2006, 164). Along with this link on the website,
Dean maintained a blog where 26 percent of the postings talked about fundraising and appealing
In June 2003, 7 months before the first primary contest, Howard Dean had 259 Dean for
President Meetups occurring in 239 cities in the US (Sosnik 2006, 164). People would go to
meetup.com, sign up for a local meetup with their email address, and then attend the meeting.
After they attended the meetup many would donate in person or online. Over the summer and
into the winter, Dean developed his grassroots base by using meetup.com and converting the
numbers that were signing up for the site into fundraising. One of the keys to Dean’s strategy
was the fact that he was able to maintain constant communication with supporters by email and
through meetup.com, though he was not able to reach past his core supporters.
By the time Dean formally ended his campaign in late February 2004, he had amassed
640,937 supporters on meetup.com, with estimates of about 75,000 actually attending one of the
meetups. Starting with only $200,000 in the bank, Dean managed to raise $40 million in one
year, $30 million of which was donated online. This was due in large part to his online prowess
and ability to get individuals to “meetup” 5(Dean nets $15 million). The reason that Howard
Dean failed is complex. For one, Dean turned out to be a weak candidate, but that would have
come out early in the process, right? Not necessarily. Reasons for the failure will be given in
later sections, but it comes down to the artificial momentum that Dean was able to generate by
using new media sites like meetup.com. He never was a strong candidate because he did not have
5
It is important to note that Howard Dean did have a social networking portion of his website
called DeanLink, but very little success came of it, so it is left out of the paper.
Mascaro 10
widespread appeal, but the use of social media helped him appear as though he did, even though
he was only mobilizing his core supporters. The one thing that was apparent was that Dean’s
The 2008 election saw the emergence of Ron Paul and Barack Obama. Ron Paul is an
interesting candidate by many accounts. He had been the Libertarian candidate for President in
1988 garnering less than .5 percent of the national vote (Spiegal 2007). Paul was eventually
elected to represent the 14th District of Texas in the House of Representatives for the term
starting in 1997. Similar to Dean, Paul had little national mainstream exposure, but knew that the
Internet was going to be the best avenue for exposure, mobilization, and fundraising.
In March 2007, Paul formally declared his bid for the GOP nomination on C-SPAN (C-
SPAN). One of the attractions to Paul was his conservative platform that called for a return to the
gold standard, abolition of the I.R.S., a literal view of the constitution and smaller government
(Seelye and Wayne 2007). These non-traditional beliefs helped him gain appeal among the mass
public and the younger progressive demographic. With this message and understanding of where
his support would come from, Ron Paul took to the Internet.
As a contrast to Dean, Ron Paul had many more avenues for dissemination of
information on the Internet. Like Dean, Paul used meetup.com with well over 1,000 groups that
supported him (Seelye and Wayne 2007). Paul also had a blog updated by staffers that would
give an update on various campaign happenings. At one point in 2007, “Ron Paul” was the most
searched for term on the blog indexing website technorati.com (Wilson 2007). This helps
illustrate the success of Ron Paul harnessing the Internet to get his name out in an attempt to
build support.
Mascaro 11
Paul used the video sharing website youtube.com to release campaign information and
videos promoting him because he did not have the same access to the media that other candidates
had early in the electoral process. Paul was actually the only GOP primary candidate excluded
from a FOXNews debate, but because of his access to new medium he was still able to get his
message out (Top of the Ticket Blog). The YouTube channel, “RonPaul2008dotcom” had over
50,000 subscribers and had well over 7 million views of the videos on the channel. The content
of these videos ranged from traditional campaign ads to an interview with James Kotecki in a
Ron Paul also harnessed the power of new media such as social networks, especially
Facebook and MySpace. On Facebook, Paul had amassed over 100,000 supporters and thousands
of posts on his wall by the time he ended his campaign in June 2008. An illustration of the
success of his online strategy is evident in the fact that Ron Paul was actually chosen as a winner
along with Barack Obama in a mock “MySpace” primary in January 2008 (McCarthy 2008).
These social networks allowed Ron Paul to connect with users offering them a place to
congregate and share messages online and connect with supporters by posting information and
The success of Paul’s use of the Internet to fundraise and mobilize support did not
translate into real votes for the candidate, but he was able to raise a large sum of money. On
November 5, 2007, the “Ron Paul Money Bomb” campaign netted Paul $4.2 million in 24 hours
(Hoffman 2008). The reasons for Paul’s failure in the actual campaign will be analyzed in later
sections in comparison to Dean and Obama, but it is now important to look at a successful
Barack Obama gained national attention after his 2004 Democratic National Convention
speech. Being a relative newcomer to the national political landscape when the 2008 Presidential
primary season got underway, Obama realized that he would need to be innovative to mobilize
support. Part of this innovation was realizing the need to target a different set of fundraisers,
because his competition for the Democratic nomination was from the entrenched Democratic
Early in his Presidential campaign Obama asked Mark Gorenberg to join his national
finance committee, to help him target the Silicon Valley market – the home of emerging
technology. Mark Gorenberg was a Silicon Valley veteran who had done fundraising for John
Kerry in 2004 and therefore had political experience (Green 2008). Though Gorenberg was using
a new medium to raise money and get information out, he was dealing with antiquated political
entities. Until 2004, the Internet had mostly been used by candidates to distribute the typical
campaign brochure. That changed in 2008, giving Gorenberg a great opportunity (Green 2008).
When Gorenberg joined Obama’s national finance committee, “he was pleased to
discover an institutional culture eager to embrace new ideas about building user-generated
networks (Green 2008).” This shift in culture and Obama’s status as a relative long shot early on
in the campaign meant that the campaign had little to lose. Therefore, the campaign had the
ability for the campaign to utilize innovative techniques. By using the Internet, the Obama
campaign was able to reach a larger audience, many of which had not participated in the political
fundraising process in the past (Green 2008). These individuals, like those Paul and Dean were
Green also notes that the campaign culture made the Obama campaign a natural fit for
Mark Spinner, a media executive and entrepreneur. Mark Spinner had only been active in politics
a short time, but after going to an Obama fundraiser in February 2006 he got involved. Following
the fundraiser, Spinner reached out to his “friends” on the social networking sites LinkedIN,
Facebook and MySpace, looking for individuals that would be interested in donating money to
In order to augment the already existing social networks to help raise money and
mobilize support for Obama, Spinner created an online affinity group called “Entrepreneurs for
Obama.” In May 2006, Obama appeared by videoconference to this group (Green 2008). This
affinity group was the precursor to what became the foundation of Obama’s new media success
My.BarackObama.com allowed users to join and take an active role in the campaign. At
the heart of the website was a social network where individuals could link up with other
supporters and share ideas. A user can also create groups and attract other individuals to support
Obama. The website also allowed individuals to get a list of phone numbers to call to help enlist
support for Obama (Green 2008). The website was an integral part of Obama’s success because
it allowed people to take a very active or passive role, a choice that had been lacking in other
campaigns6.
website to help solicit money from others to support Obama. These powerful tools allowed
Obama to reach out to individuals with small amounts of money that wanted to play a part in
6
The website still does exist, but since the election victory in November no longer focuses on
campaigning and instead focuses on disseminating information and helps facilitate discussion
among supporters.
Mascaro 14
politics, but could not attend the traditional $2,000 per plate dinner. This model allowed Obama
to raise over $500 million online throughout his campaign, with 65 percent of the $150 million
raised in September 2008 coming from online donations. Overall, 3 million donors made over
6.5 million donations, 6 million of which were in increments of less than $100 (Vargas 2008).
The prior online fundraising record for a campaign was $27 million by Howard Dean in 2004, a
In the 2008 Democratic primary season, only 26 percent of the donations to Hillary
Clinton’s campaign were under $200, yet she still managed to raise millions and compete well
against Obama (Green 2008). Therefore, based on the statistics, Hillary was more reliant on the
traditional donor base that Obama had trouble tapping into initially, a problem Obama countered
by appealing to the younger and more technologically savvy demographic. These statistics
illustrate the vastly different campaigns that the two major Democratic candidates ran in the
primary7.
Even though Barack Obama had his own official social network, individuals also took
the initiative to help stand up sites on mainstream social networks to help support him. In early
2007, on the day that Obama announced his presidential exploratory committee, Farouk Olu
Aregbe started a group on Facebook group, “One Million Strong for Barack.” In less than a
week, the group had 10,000 members and within a month it had over 278,000 members (Vargas
2007). As of early June 2008, the group had amassed over 570,000 members and was one of the
most popular groups on Facebook. It is also important to note that Barack Obama’s own
7
Although the campaign of Clinton is outside the scope of this paper it is important to note her
relative inability to successfully raise money and mobilize support relative to Obama online to
show Obama’s true innovative approach in a similar timeframe.
Mascaro 15
Facebook page had over 3 million supporters immediately following his election victory,
The Obama campaign also used Twitter.com, a micro-blogging, social network to keep
supporters current with what the campaign was doing. The purpose of twitter.com is to answer
the question, “What are you doing?” so that friends (followers in twitter parlance) can keep up to
date with the activities of the twitterer. Obama’s campaign updated his twitter page many times
daily detailing where Obama was and what he was doing. Obama also announced his Vice-
President selection of Joe Biden via Twitter and mobile text message before releasing the
information to the press (Stelter 2008). In late October 2008, right before the election, Barack
Obama was the number one “twitterer” on the Internet with over 100,000 followers8. No other
In addition to the use of Twitter, the Obama campaign also developed an application for
the iPhone to help users of the device take a more active role in the campaign. The iPhone
application used an individual’s location to help direct them toward campaign events in the area
and other ways to get involved. The application also helped facilitate calling friends from the
individual’s phone book based on their location and delivered media and news updates of the
campaign directly to the phone. All of these features were very basic, but when combined they
The use of new media by Obama contributed greatly to his general election win in
November 2008. Obama went from being a relatively unknown national political figure before
his 2004 DNC speech to President in 4 years. While it can be argued that the use of new media
by Obama was integral to his election and without it he would not have been as successful, it is
8
This statistic has grown to well over 250,000 since October 2008. President Obama last
updated his Twitter account the day before inauguration.
Mascaro 16
also important to analyze the issues that Obama promoted. Obama had a relatively mainstream
Democratic stance on many issues, which appealed to the younger, more technically savvy
voters.
Obama is arguably the first Presidential candidate with an agenda dealing with
technological issues; the very issues many of his supporters cared about. Obama’s technology
platform called for a more open government by using the Internet for information dissemination
and the protection of the openness of the Internet and maintaining “net neutrality9” (Barack
Obama Campaign Website). These two objectives helped him appeal to his base. Obama is living
up to his objectives by disseminating his weekly address via YouTube and as a Podcast in iTunes
and embedding these videos on the website change.gov and whitehouse.gov (Farber 2008). As of
November 24, 2008, Obama’s first address had been viewed over 900,000 times on YouTube.
So the question still stands, why was Obama so successful whereas Paul and Dean were
not? The answer cannot solely be found in the quality of the candidates and their positions on
issues, though those reasons are significant. It is clear that Obama was successful in using the
new media to help bolster himself as a candidate and translate this attention into real votes. Both
Dean and Paul were weak candidates that had artificially been inflated because their access to
new media made them able to rally support though they were inherently weaker than Obama.
Their differing strategies lead to the their success or failure and offered lessons learned for future
campaigns.
9
Net Neutrality is the concept that a user will be able to use the Internet for whatever lawful
purpose they wish independent of the Internet service provider (ISP) they choose. Some ISP’s
have experimented with limiting the use of some websites or services and this is exactly what
Obama is trying to limit.
Mascaro 17
Howard Dean, being the bellwether of using emerging new media such as social
networks, was partially the victim of being an early adopter. Dean was also a flawed candidate
that was able to garner artificial momentum because of his understanding of the new medium.
After his speech at the California State Democratic Convention in 2003, Howard Dean
catapulted onto the national scene, because he had a message and a medium to discuss it in.
Unlike candidates in the past, Dean had access to tools that could be utilized on a very a limited
budget to garner support and did not depend on traditional media or the national party to fully
recognize him.
Therefore, Dean was able to appeal to the masses and, by mobilizing the individuals
online to have them meet offline, he began to form geographically disparate groups that would
help him gain national momentum. His use of the online medium to mobilize helped him reach
beyond what he typically would be able to reach, but he was still dealing with a very small
amount of individuals that participated in these types of sites. As Dean garnered more followers,
national news outlets recognized this momentum and Dean began receiving traditional media
attention, which further contributed to his momentum. Though unsuccessful in his bid for the
nomination, the greatest success of Dean’s campaign was illustrating that the Internet could be
Unlike Dean, Ron Paul used the Internet to organize individuals online with the focus of
having them meet up online and offline. Paul, like Dean, may not have been the most popular
candidate, but he helped generate his own excitement by using the Internet as a rallying force to
generate a greater mass-market appeal and more campaign contributions. Paul used all of the
new media outlets in an effective manner to get time on traditional media outlets, very similar to
Mascaro 18
Dean. Paul and his supporters used this exposure to raise large amounts of money in single day
Paul’s Internet strategy was the next logical step from Dean’s because the technology had
matured and he had some unique vision for how to harness that technology. The individuals that
Paul was appealing to, happened to be in the younger demographic and had more experience
with the new, participatory media that Paul was using. These actions helped Paul better appeal to
his supporters, but in the end he did not translate the support into votes as evidenced by the
The reasons for Paul’s lack of success were still similar to Dean’s. Paul and Dean did not
have a coordinated strategy to mobilize voters. They were good at developing momentum, but
this momentum had no focal point for supporters to come back to. Therefore, the momentum was
somewhat artificial in that the momentum did not translate into real votes and only existed
because of their use of new media. Overall, Paul’s message was too targeted to the “partisans” as
Obama ran a very successful campaign, as evidenced by his winning of the Democratic
nomination and then the Presidency. What set Obama apart from the failures of Dean and Paul?
One differentiating factor was that Obama was a stronger candidate than Paul or Dean. Also,
Obama had a lot of competition from the Democratic elite, most specifically Hillary Clinton,
who had a solid fundraising and support base, and therefore Obama had to innovate. What
Obama did differently from the others in the past and his opponents in the primaries was reach
out using new social media and then draw his supporters back to a central focal point,
my.BarackObama.com.
Mascaro 19
The fact that Obama was using new technology such as social networks and mobilizing
individuals during the primary season helped him throughout the primaries and into the general
election. The two-step registration process that is unique to the United States was somewhat
overcome, because of the very exciting primary season (Jackson 1996). Using these new tools
and appealing to a younger base allowed Obama to defeat Hillary Clinton in the primary
Obama’s key demographic was younger and technologically savvy, but not necessarily
politically savvy. These individuals wanted some sort of change and Obama gave them a place to
make themselves feel relevant. By allowing such an array of opportunities on his website and by
constantly updating the social media sites that he and his staff controlled, his supporters felt like
they actually mattered in the campaign. This excitement and support led to one of the highest
election turnouts in 40 years, with 61.7 of the total voting-eligible population (VEP) voting
(George Mason 2009)10. On the other hand, Dean and Paul’s supporters were able to feel like
they mattered, but quickly realized that there was no central place for them to focus their efforts
This sense of involvement that Obama’s campaign generated made individuals feel as
though they should contribute money or come out to a rally. A Pew Research Center Study
conducted after the election in November 2008 illustrated interesting statistics about voters in the
2008 election. Sixty-six percent of those under the age of 30 voted for Barack Obama, which is a
13 percent disparity with the overall vote percentage garnered by Barack Obama of 53 percent.
Twenty-eight percent of young voters in battleground states attended a campaign event. This
10
The VEP is different from the Voting-Age Population (VAP), which is based on Census data
and those old enough to vote. The VEP takes into account those ineligible to vote, which often
times yields to higher percentages than those statistics using the VAP.
Mascaro 20
statistic alone helps illustrate the success of the Obama’s campaign strategy to widely broadcast
their message and invite people to take part online and offline. In addition to those who attended
campaign events in the battleground states, 25 percent of those voters in the 18-29 demographic
claimed that someone from the Obama campaign contacted them about coming out to vote, a
figure that reached well over 50 percent in battleground states such as Pennsylvania and Nevada.
This is in stark contrast to the 13 percent of those in the 18-29 demographic that reported being
The statistics of those that were mobilized to vote and participate in campaign events are
very convincing. The fact that Obama used new technologies such as social networks and blogs
allowed him to reach out and mobilize individuals that he was then able to draw back to a central
point -- his own social networking site. This allowed the campaign to maintain contact with the
supporters that joined the Obama networks on the official social network or on similar pages on
Facebook or other social networks. This contact then created a positive feedback loop for support
and mobilization. These activities by the Obama campaign were in sharp contrast to the
disparate, and at times chaotic, online activities of Paul and Dean that never had a focal point and
never attempted to reach out to those outside of the their core supporters.
Now that Barack Obama is the President, a lot of possibilities exist for new media and
politics. Obama has already shown that he will keep to his promise of using the Internet to make
government more transparent. Obama is entering the White House with a network of millions of
supporters and an instant way to connect with them independent of the traditional news outlets.
This will allow him to control the message he is disseminating and be direct with the citizens of
Mascaro 21
the United States. With the comfortable Democratic majority in Congress and this control of the
media, Barack Obama should be able to make a real difference early in his Presidency.
communicate. This technology can be used to help strong candidates become stronger or to allow
relatively weak candidates to gain artificial momentum making them seem like better candidates
than they are. The key to using the disparate types of social media is to reach out and draw
supporters in, while continuing to reach out to the different forms of social media to find more
supporters and mobilize them to come out to vote. What really set Obama apart was that he was
able to circumvent the traditional mobilization cycle of only appealing to those that voted in the
past or strong partisans and in turn brought out many new voters or those that had not voted in
and the candidates become more comfortable with it. The fact that Obama has used the Internet
in such a successful manner raises the bar for future candidates to find innovative ways to
fundraise and mobilize voters online. A lot of these techniques will be dictated by the technology
available, but it is possible that some of this technology may evolve as a result of the use of the
Reference List
Anderson, Kevin. 2004. Internet insurgent Howard Dean. BBC News Online, January 14,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3394897.stm.
Brown, Theodore. 1998. Carey Estes Kefauver. Tennessee Encyclopedia of History and
Culture. http://tennesseeencyclopedia.net/imagegallery.php?EntryID=K005.
Dulio, David A., Goff, Donald L. and Thurber, James A. 1999. Untangled Web: Internet
Use during the 1998 Election. PS: Political Science and Politics 32.1: 53-59.
Farber, Dan. 2008. Obama appoints YouTube (Google) as secretary of video. Outside the
Lines Blog. http://news.cnet.com/obama-appoints-youtube-google-as-secretary-of-
video.
George Mason University. United States Elections Project: 2008 General Election Turnout
Rates. January 29, 2009. http://elections.gmu.edu/Turnout_2008G.html.
Goldstein, Kenneth M. and Ridout, Travis N. 2002. The Politics of Participation: Mobilization
and Turnout over Time. Political Behavior. 24.1 : 3-29.
Green, Joshua. 2008. The Amazing Money Machine. The Atlantic, June 2008.
Holbrook Thomas M. and McClurg, Scott D. 2005. The Mobilization of Core Supporters:
Campaigns, Turnout and Electoral Composition in United States Presidential Elections.
American Journal of Political Science. 49.4: 689-703.
Keeter, Scott, Horowitz, Juliana, and Tyson, Alec. Young Voters in the 2008 Election. Pew
Research Center. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1031/young-voters-in-the-2008-election.
Lupia, Arthur, and Baird, Zoe. 2003. Can Web Sites Change Citizens? Implications of the
Web White and Blue 2000. PS: Political Science and Politics 36.1: 77-82.
McCarthy, Caroline. 2008. Surprise! Barack Obama, Ron Paul win MySpace ‘primaries’.
The Social Blog, January 3, http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-9839328-36.html.
Napoli, Lisa. 2003. Like Online Dating, With a Political Spin. New York Times Online,
March 13,
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D01E6DA133EF930A25750C0A
9659C8B63#.
Seelye, Katharine Q. and Wayne, Leslie. 2007. The Web Takes Ron Paul for a Ride. New
York Times Online, November 11,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/us/politics/11paul.html.
Smith, Aaron and Rainie, Lee. The Internet and the 2008 Election. Pew Internet & American
Life Project. June 15, 2008.
Sosnik, Douglas B., Dowd, Matthew J., and Fournier, Ron. 2006. Applebees’s America.
Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.
Spiegal, Brendan. 2007. Ron Paul: How a Fringe Politician Took Over the Web. Wired Online,
June 2006. http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/06/ron_paul.
Stelter, Brian. 2008. Hearts A-Twitter Over Obama V.P. Text. The Caucus Blog.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/hearts-a-twitter-over-obama-vp-
text/.
Top of the Ticket Blog. Ron Paul, muffled by Fox, wows Jay Leno. Los Angeles Times
Online. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/01/ronpaulreigns.html.
United States Senate Historical Minutes. 1950. Kefauver Crime Committee Launched.
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/minute/Kefauver_Crime_Committee_Launc
hed.htm.
Vargas, Jose Antonio. 2007. Young Voters Find Voice on Facebook. Washington Post,
February 17, A01, National Edition.
Vargas, Jose Antonio. 2008. Obama Raised Half a Billion Online. Washington Post
Online, November 20, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-
trail/2008/11/20/obama_raised_half_a_billion_on.html.
Mascaro 24
Williams, Andrew Paul, Trammell, Kaye D., Postelnicu, Monica, Landreville, Kristen D.
and Martin, Justin D. 2005. Blogging and Hyperlinking: use of the Web to enhance
viability during the 2004 US campaign. Journalism Studies 6.2: 177-186.
Wilson, Chris. 2007. Ron Paul’s Online Rise. US News & World Report Online, May 9,
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/news-desk/2007/5/9/ron-pauls-online-rise.html.