I will admit I am somewhat disappointed at the difference between internet-based polls and site traffic and the real-world voting booths. According to the almighty internet, Ron Paul should be the candidate of choice, followed closely by Obama and Mike Gravel. Though Obama seems to be the only of the three that this writer has noticed generating serious internet buzz, the fact remains that the canidates with the most hits are the ones that appear to be striking out in the field of politics.

Ron Paul’s online backing has been described as nothing less than a revolution (Yes, coining the phrase from his own campaign slogan), while he takes a meager 1% during voting. Does this mean that the “mass online community” is just too busy or unwilling to take their effort to the polls, or that the online masses may still be in such a minority that a seemingly immense community is actually a very small number of the overall population.

Perhaps when voting goes online we will see a change in the process, but at least for now we have a median of getting information out that endless campaign commercials and billboard ads can’t provide.

Consider this somewhat unrelated and unresearched spill for what it is. I’m not a political expert, nor am I a Republican or a Democrat. I’m an observer that is caught off guard by what I view as a significant backing resulting in insignificant results at the polls.