from:

How the Web Is Changing Presidential Campaigns

February 8, 2000
Web posted at: 12:21 PM EST (1721 GMT)

By Michael Eskenazi

(TIME.com) -- Only a few years ago, political analysts dreamed of a future in which most Americanswould be plugged into the Net, allowing us to realize the vision ofAmerica's founding fathers: Minds from across the land would connect;coalitions would be formed; a more perfect union would emerge. So is thisfuture now?

Yes and no. Two thousand marks the first election year in which the majority ofAmericans (and the great majority of American voters) can access the Web.It is having a noticeable impact on fund-raising: In the past month we've seen Steve Forbes use a mass e-mail campaign to garner 30 percent of the vote inIowa and John McCain leverage his New Hampshire primary victory into awindfall of online donations. But it is less clear how effective the Web has been as a purveyor of ideas and as an organizing medium. So far, there's no consensus among political observers on exactly how large an impact the Web is having, and whatit means for future campaigns.

There's some evidence that we've arrived -- consider thatof the $810,000 that flowed into John McCain's web site in the first 48 hours following his New Hampshire win, 40 percent came from first-time campaign donors.Further, voter registration among college-age citizens is rising fasterthan it has in decades. For years the public complained that theregistration process was too complicated, but now groups such as Rock theVote -- which is linked to many pop culture web sites, including thoseof musical groups -- mail voter registration materials to those who fill out a simpleonline form. The fruit of these efforts can already be felt, as the NewHampshire primaries saw record turnouts.

Evidence of the Web's growing financial clout is primarily anecdotal, as the numbers are hard to come by. Since most online donations are relatively small, and the FEC doesn't itemize the sources of donations under $200, nobody's been able to reliably track what percentage of this year's contributions has come online. "I think the Web is having an impact, but not a decisive one," says TIME Washington correspondent Matthew Cooper. "It's proved a wayto get people to instantaneously react to a message they like andcontribute to a campaign, as we learned from John McCain's win in NewHampshire. But it has yet to prove itself as a way of getting a messageout."

This much is clear -- every major candidate this year is taking the Web seriously. Steve Forbes plans to invest a million dollarsin his site. "While we're not sure how big of an impact the Internet willhave, it has clearly already revolutionized campaigning," says SheilaKrumholz, research director of the Center for Responsive Politics, acampaign finance watchdog group. "Candidates have moved quickly to tailorthe messages on their sites to a whole host of voters. George W. Bush, forexample, as he targets Latino voters, can have a page in Spanish. Whenpeople surf the Web looking for Spanish-language political sites, they'llget Bush's message." Even more important, notes Krumholz, is the powerthe Web gives upstart campaigns. While conventional mass mailings have limited appeal, usually returning less than 20 percent on the dollar, and telephone campaigns require huge numbers of volunteers to man the phones, e-mails and web postings have comparatively low costs associated with them.

The year 2000 will probably be remembered more as the year when candidatesexperimented with the Web, rather than when they first staked theircampaigns on it. Web surfers are currently being inundated with a varietyof aesthetics and gadgets. George W. Bush has asleek but simple site that features a calculator that allows visitors to figure how much they'd save on their tax bill under his tax cut proposal. That idea was lifted from www.forbes2000.com, and Steve Forbes' site is easily the most innovative.A cluster of buttons on the home page invites users to get involved in"e-precincts." Through this concept, Forbes has volunteers takeresponsibility for peppering a particular constituency with targetede-mails. This way, any time a major event happens on an issue, Forbes canimmediately get his message out to voters who've showed an interest in thattopic. This tack worked in Iowa, where Forbes followed each debate andcampaign appearance Bush made with a rebuttal on issues of concern to thestates various regions.

The big question for now is how much an effective web site can compensatefor a lack of campaign infrastructure. John McCain took New Hampshire byspending months in the Granite State, attending scores of town hallmeetings and shaking thousands of hands in the process. But McCain, unlikeBush, doesn't have a national campaign infrastructure, and certainly doesn'thave time to kiss babies in every county across the land. He won't evenhave time to visit half of the 26 states that hold primaries between March7 and March 14. "The Web is crucial to McCain," says Krumholz. "Typicallyhis contributions aren't the $500 and $1,000 Bush is getting, they'resmaller, which is why he needs to get out and reach more people." To thisend, McCain's testing several online innovations. Next week, for example,he'll host a $250-per-user online discussion. "For someone like McCain,who needs to reach a lot of people quickly, there's nothing like a website," says Krumholz. "It's both detached and instant. You can be there24 hours a day, connecting with people across the country. But at the sametime, there's a lack of the human touch that you get by campaigning inperson."

Figuring out just how much that human touch is missed will provide plentyof fodder for pollsters and campaign managers for the next four years.Cybercampaigning is still a crude art form, and the Class of 2000candidates are pioneers. In the coming years you can expect every aspect ofthis year's online results to be dissected and examined. The ideasthat work will be adopted widely by future candidates; the ones that don'twill be forgotten -- just like yesterday's candidates.

Copyright © 2000 Time Inc.