Michael Whitney ran into Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr and found out that the former Georgia lawmaker writes his own entries on the social networking site Twitter. Whitney has some fun with the discovery, noting that a few of Barr's entries are semantically challenged.

A couple of other interesting things I noticed while looking at Barr's Twitter account: He's following far more people (4,795) than he has followers (767). That can't be a good sign when you're a candidate for federal office. Especially when his closest ideological counterpart is Ron Paul, a true Internet phenomenon. However, he's also only posted 24 entries so far. So, maybe the number of followers will spike in the coming days/months.

Barr is using the account mainly as a promotional device, but you have question some of the content he's putting out there. Out of those 24 "updates," 7 are requests to follow his website and/or Twitter account. 5 updates are links to Bob Barr You Tube videos and the rest are links to articles about/by Barr.

There have been a number of polls and stories about Bob Barr's potential impact on the 2008 presidential election. Specifically, how might his candidacy as the Libertarian Party's nominee affect John McCain? And more specifically, how might Barr hurt McCain in key states like Barr's home state of Georgia, and North Carolina, where he recently polled at 8 percent and 6 percent, respectively.

One thing I haven't seen is what actual Georgia Republicans feel about the Barr campaign. Single digit polls aren't very reliable and I find the 8 percent estimate a little hard to believe. However, when I put in a call and email to the Georgia Republican Party to ask about Barr's impact, I got a canned quote instead of the forthright interview I was asking for. Does that mean the state GOP is genuinely worried about Barr, and thus not wanting to talk about him directly? Or, are they just busy with their own campaigns? Here's the quote, for what it's worth:

"Conservatives will support Senator John McCain in November because of his commitment to lower taxes and smaller government.  He is a candidate with the judgment and experience we need in a Commander in Chief.  The choice in November will be clear and Georgia voters will support Senator McCain and his agenda to deliver the right change for America."

Sue P. Everhart

Chairman, Georgia Republican Party

Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr appeared on The Colbert Report last night to discuss his anti-libertarian views while serving as a Republican member of Congress:

Townhall's Matt Lewis has a video interview with Bob Barr, where the former Republican congressman discusses his run for the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. Barr tells Lewis that John McCain's successful run for the nomination made it "easier" for Barr to leave the Republicans and that he doesn't mind playing the potential spoiler, ala Ralph Nader.

Libertarians want their ideas, and to a lesser extent, their candidates, to be taken seriously. Ex-Rep. Bob Barr's entrance into the Libertarian Party primary will gin up some attention for the former lawmaker and get a small amount of press today, but he's not the candidate to carry libertarians into the position of being America's influential third party. However, the far more pressing question is whether he can steal enough votes to derail John McCain's chances in November? As I noted last month, Barr lacks the necessary qualities to be a viable presidential candidate.

Tech President also thinks Barr will have a tough time duplicating the enthusiasm of Ron Paul. And let's not forget that for all the money and rallies raised in Paul's honor, he's never been an electorally competitive candidate:

It’s unlikely that Barr will be able to replicate the successes of Ron Paul without a strong endorsement from Paul and a passing-of-the-torch moment. Paul supporters remain deeply loyal to their candidate, and seem gung ho in their efforts to transform the Republican Party through aggressive (some say annoying) means.

As Tech President notes, Barr's announcement comes at the same time Ron Paul's supporters are stating their intent to not give up on his campaign even if he cant' win the Republican Party's nomination. The Los Angeles Times looks into how Ron Paul supporters plan to disrupt the Republican convention.

Last month, Allahpundit downplayed the threat of Barr run, with one exception:

The only potential trouble spot is Georgia, where Barr is from and where Obama did surprisingly well among young white voters. He could factor into a close race there and knock a lean-McCain state into toss-up, but Georgia’s got a Republican governor and two Republican senators available to campaign if things get hairy. Where exactly is the threat here?

George Will writes in his Newsweek column on how former Bob Barr could be to John McCain what Ralph Nader was to Al Gore in 2000 if the former Georgia congressman wins the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. The notion of a Barr presidential run has been picking up steam in libertarian circles and some blogs, but I think the estimation of his potential impact is greatly exaggerated.

First, Will cites the past presidential runs of George Wallace and Nader, and notes the highly successful fundraising efforts of Ron Paul in this year's Republican primary. The comparison is flawed at best. As Will himself notes, Wallace had three things going for him that Barr does not:

Wallace had the three traits that, when combined, make a third-party candidate formidable. He had a burning issue (national disorder that he blamed on the civil-rights revolution), a regional base (the South) and a vivid personality.

When Nader ran in 2000 he was a nationally recognized figure with more than 30 years of public service, best-selling books, and had the benefit of competing against an Al Gore campaign that many viewed as subpar in an election many also thought didn't matter.

Ron Paul did in fact raise a lot of money over the past year, but he didn't win enough votes to affect the Republican primaries in meaningful way, like Mike Huckabee did. Also, it wasn't Paul's libertarian views that drew his large swaths of supporters and "money bombs," it was his anti-war sentiment. Barr may also oppose the war, but he won't appeal to liberal and anti-war constituencies in the same way Paul did and continues to do so. Paul also manged to fend off a recent challenge to his Texas congressional seat, while Barr lost his in 2002.

I think most libertarians know if they really wanted to run a strong Libertarian Party candidate this year, that candidate would be Ron Paul. And even then, his true electoral impact would be minimal. But the money he could raise for building up the LP, would be very significant. But Paul has already ruled out a second run on the Libertarian ticket (he was their nominee in 1988).

Reason's Dave Weigel looks more at what Barr's candidacy might mean for the Libertarian Party and Stacy McCain interviews Barr over at the American Spectator website.