Some wise person, long ago, said 'politics make strange bedfellows.' (And some wise editor said even more recently, 'If I have to see one more column that leads with that quote, I'll . . .') Well, this is the Internet Age, so it's time to edit that worn-out cliche, in the hopes of giving it new life. I say 'politics makes strange Web sites.'

'Tis the season to elect new leaders for our nation, and so 'tis also the season for everyone and their sibling with an ounce of political interest to launch a Web site devoted to political news. Most of these sites are being launched by folks who once played the game, and are now retired (either by their own choice or by unfortunate dint of the press exposing their particular peccadilloes).

Some of the new entries include: Vote.com, started up by former Clinton advisor Dick Morris, who was forced to walk away from Washington after revelations that he fathered a child out of wedlock (though at least he was paying child support, something that should not be taken for granted in this day and age). Morris also is the author of a new book about the 'Net and politics, cleverly named 'Vote.com.' Grassroots.com, which counts among its founders such political notables as former White House press secretary Mike McCurry, former White House Chief of Staff John Sununu, retired U.S. Senator Paul Simon (D-Ill.), and 1984 Democratic VP nominee Geraldine Ferraro (who was female Democratic New York politics before Hilary was even Hilary). Overthrowthegov.com, the brainchild of conservative commentator Arianna Huffington. Only in America could an immigrant come to the country, become a media personality whose commentary is noticed in the highest of circles, and then create a Web site that (on face) sounds like a call to revolt against the system, and still not go to jail for sedition. Ah, democracy!

For outlets that were already around before the latest dance started, now is their time to show off for the public what their hardware and wetware (i.e. reporters) can do. CNN's AllPolitics has the usual interactive multimedia offerings. Slate and Salon, ever competitive, are both working hard to be as fast as they can with all the latest and greatest from the trail. In fact, Slate is under some fire lately for revealing exit poll results while the polls are still open, something that the major TV networks agreed not to do decades ago (not collusion, mind you, oh no, just protecting the public interest).

The common thread among all these sites is that they advocate a change in the way things are done. They are dedicated to all the usual noble goals: informing voters, presenting all sides, giving a fair hearing to the issues, etc. The difference here is that these sites want to tap public opinion in new and Internet-enabled ways (e.g., Vote.com's practice of asking visitors to vote on subjects, and then allowing them to send their choice, along with their email address and zip code, to the relevant parties at issue). All these choices and avenues for voters to educate themselves come at a time when at least one primary race is still up for grabs. Of course, nobility is a nice thing on paper, but not something practiced by all. Take a look at Politics.com, a nice site with interesting content that just so happens to list its stock ticker symbol in its banner, less than an inch above a link entitled 'Follow the Money,' that tracks candidate donations. Democracy and capitalism all wrapped up into one. I can smell the apple pie and hear the Star-Spangled Banner as I write.

Not to be outdone, the candidates are milking the Internet for all it is worth. John McCain has emerged as the master Internet self-marketer. His site welcomes visitors with a pop-up window asking for donations. Though the numbers are disputed, McCain at least claims to have raised $2 million through the Internet alone after winning New Hampshire (though his staff would not release a donor list to an inquisitive professor from George Washington University). Of course, keeping up with the Joneses is the nature of the game, so now George W. Bush has a pop-up 'gimme money' box too (in the same place as McCain's). On the other side of the aisle, Gore and Bradley both ask for money, but as menu bar items rather than in a separate window (not that this really makes a difference).

The money issue is big. If McCain is really raising $200K a day online, then Bush may be in a run for his money. Even though he is breaking spending records left and right (which he can do since he isn't taking Federal funds), if McCain keeps up this pace then he could raise in the mid eight digits solely through the Internet. No kissing hands or shaking babies. No $200-a-plate dinners (though he is fond of $250-per-person Web chats). Just sitting back and letting the pop-up window and the credit card verification software work their magic. Nice gig if you can get it.

An aside here: Gore got really unlucky in the domain-name game. He doesn't own two of the most intuitive site names for his campaign, algore.com and gore2000.com. They were both snagged almost three years ago, and now link to a site selling political paraphenalia. This could end up hurting him if the Internet becomes as important to this election as it could be, and voters can't find his site. Might it be time to invoke the Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act? George Bush is using it to try and shut down GWBush.com.

Of course, the Internet is also a tried-and-true home to parody, satire, and out-and-out opposition. (Gore is the brunt of a lot of it ever since he claimed to have invented the Internet). If the four major candidates were to take some of their 'free time' (Saturdays 3:30-5:00 a.m.) and search the Internet, they might find some of the following: AllGore.com, a parody site of Gore's campaign page. The poll asking what Gore's number one priority should be includes options like 'free refills' and 'giving each child a talking chihuahua.' GWBush.com, a much more scathing parody than the previous site. In fact, if I were Bush, I think my feelings would genuinely be hurt. The site sells bumper stickers with such pearls of wisdom as 'Don't blame Dubya ... He's a victim of Social Promotion.' Dancing John McCain, a cheesy animation that appears to be the harshest parody of McCain online. Perhaps the 'Net community is as in love with the Senator as the media is alleged to be. Bradley-Gore2000.com, a site that plants tongue firmly in cheek and talks about Bradley's campaign for President with Gore as his running mate. The satire is laid on heavily here.

There have even been some apparent attempts at candidate-directed maliciousness online. On the 18th the the FBI shut down a copy of McCain's donation page being run by California-based MediaKing International without the candidate's knowledge and permission. MediaKing officials said that they just wanted to help McCain raise funds, and that they only collected $180 total. The FTC calls the practice 'page jacking,' and this is apparently the first time that it has been done and the collection of money was involved.

All hope is not lost, however. Democracy thrives in spite of itself. ABC reports on growing attempts to begin online voting, a topic of great appropriateness in this environment. As the election gets closer and closer, the candidates are sure to fight more and more of their battles online, which in a sense is good. Voters will be able to choose what they want to hear and from whom. It will lend even more legitimacy to the Internet as a tool for public participation in governance. For perhaps the first time, a candidate's policies on the Internet could sway people's voting choices in the way the economy or the arms race used to do.

For those of us political junkies, it's a great time to be alive. All politics, all the time. The promise of the Internet (yet another now-tired phrase) really is being demonstrated by this year's election cycle. By the next repeat of this quadrennial road show, in 2004, look for at least one candidate to campaign completely online. Look for that candidate's supporters to be able to vote for him or her online. And don't be surprised if the Internet Candidate wins.