"...More of the conversation leaned Obama's way (35%) than Romney's (22%). But those who favored Obama tweeted not so much to praise him as to criticize his opponent. Of the entire conversation, 9% praised the president and 26% was critical of Romney. Of those favoring Romney, 7% praised him and 15% criticized Obama."
This can't be too surprising to many people. Twitter is new social media--new social media is used by young people--young people are democratic--I twitter; therefor I Obama.
Yesterday I saw #ThingsThatOffendObama trending shortly, but on the whole, #Romnesia and other Mitt Romney trends, like #bigbird or #binders dominate the presidential duel on Twitter. The candidates therefore use social media differently--on my Twitter feed, Obama updates are far more common than Romney's.
Not by much, Romney uses Facebook more than Obama (Is Facebook already "old?" I am friends with my Mema, Aunts, and Uncles on Facebook for over a year now...). At the pace this society moves, as we are so fond of saying, who's to say that can't be true, at least relatively?
Much of this outline the expectations in common-knowledge demographics, but what is often forgotten is that, although Romney trails in the internet, television is the main source of news for most people, where they have both candidates running a close race.
The social media demographics are another resurgence of the parallels of our political situation. Young people--new(twitter)--blue. Old people--tradition(television, even Facebook)--red. Politicians act accordingly, spending their time with said venue(s).
The media rave about how social media, YouTube, and cell-phones have changed the world, but in this case, it's just a new way to express the same cultural and political contours.