This election cycle has brought about a number of websites providing some rather cool interactive electoral maps to engage people and keep them coming back to their respective sites. As a fan of politics (and obviously the web) myself, below are some sites I have come across with the positives and negatives associated with them:

270towin (my presidential predictions were based off of this previously):

• Positives: Easy to quickly change states from red to blue to toss-up, can split Maine and Nebraska electoral votes, shows the number of winning combinations, probabilities of who can win, a long history of past elections, and a 2008 electoral simulator
• Negatives: The map looks too childish and only does presidential level
• Things to improve: The simulator should not be done randomly, but rather by how the polls close (eg: East Coast to West Coast). If they really wanted to impress people, they could do fake videos for each state acting like the media does by calling it throughout the night depending on how you choose the states (or based on polling data) as this would certainly keep people coming back.

RealClearPolitics:

• Positives: Solid map (looks professional), shows the electoral spread over time, provides an easy to see polling changes, and does Congressional level
• Negatives: No Maine and Nebraska split ability and does not explain how they calculate their results leading to charges of them being biased towards the Republicans (and even though the map still shows a very strong possibility of Obama winning, their testimonials pretty much come from right-wing sites or people)
• Things to improve: Multiple kinds of maps to show electoral power of states rather than just their regular size to understand the importance of how many votes a state actually has.

Economist:

• Positives: Innovative to have the world vote through the similarity of the US electoral college for the world, gives backgrounds on each candidate with latest news, and can quickly go from country to country to see information on them
• Negatives: The number of electoral votes for the US is incorrect (they have it at 432 instead of 538), no explanation on the number of online votes needed to show votes for either candidate, and cannot click on French Guinea as you can with Greenland
• Things to improve: Same idea of showing electoral power of states, could make it more interactive by running it as a future world-wide vote for leader of the whole world rather than for the US president.

Update (5:25PM):

FiveThirtyEight is another one that’s good for seeing polling predictions based on some statistical analyses, but not necessarily for people to interact with.

Bookmark To:

Regardless of where you stand on the issues, Barack Obama’s speech at Invesco Stadium for the Democratic Convention was extremely well done. Here’s the beginning clip, but it really should be seen in full:

Bookmark To:

You know someone has had way too much free time on their hand to create this Barack Obama rick roll video:

Then again, it could be clever political advertising for the Internet generation. At least Obama knows how to use the Internet, much less use a computer compared to McCain.

Bookmark To:

Because I enjoy politics (international politics all the more), I had to put in my two cents on what I believe the outcome will be for the upcoming election. These are of course my own personal guesses, so feel free to mock me if/when I’m wrong post-November. The images come courtesy of 270towin.com, even providing for the unique electoral situations in Nebraska and Maine!

Let’s begin by showing my “Realistic Prediction” (ie: what I believe the outcome will be):

A best case scenario:

followed by a worst case scenario:

Only time will tell of course… thoughts?

Bookmark To:

Ron Paul could not win in New Hampshire with independents in the Republican Party in the most libertarian state of the nation, and therefore in my opinion I am calling it now for the end of Ron Paul’s candidacy. Sure, he can pull a Howard Dean and get some great/cushy position after the fact, but as of trying to win the Presidency, if the libertarian guy cannot do well in a libertarian state, then explain how he can do well anywhere else?

Essentially it’s like Guiliani not winning the race in New York–if he cannot win in the state where he should be the most popular–then he certainly is not going to do any better elsewhere.

Hate mail be damned, Ron Paul is effectively finished in his run for the Presidency.

Bookmark To:

Great information by Andrew Sullivan:

Tonight was in many ways devastating news for the GOP. Twice as many people turned out for the Democrats than the Republicans. Clearly independents prefer the Dems.

Now look at how the caucus-goers defined themselves in the entrance polls. Among the Dems: Very Liberal: 18 percent; Somewhat Liberal: 36 percent; Moderate: 40 percent; Conservative: 6 percent. Now check out the Republicans: Very Conservative: 45 percent; Somewhat Conservative: 43 percent; Moderate: 11 percent; Liberal: 1 percent.

One is a national party; the other is on its way to being an ideological church. The damage Bush and Rove have done - revealed in 2006 - is now inescapable.

Bookmark To:

For the most part, the libertarians I run across and are friends with are usually not very religious, so it struck me as rather odd to see a very libertarian candidate (Ron Paul) note that he does not accept evolution. Makes me wonder whether that could put a crimp in some of his supporters as libertarians are not necessarily the bunch who will not accept with so much factual basis behind it.

Personally, any candidate that is not willing to change one’s belief when the facts are right in front of you is certainly not a candidate for me to support. The commenter on Andrew Sullivan’s blog says it well:

A reader writes:

I too, wanted to pretend like I didn’t see that video of Ron Paul saying that he can’t accept Evolution.  I admire the man.  He is clearly the most legitimate GOP candidate.  But this has completely damaged my perception of him.  As an Athiest, I often find it absoultely mind-boggling that so many people in the United States, in this day and age, can still deny that Evolution is real.  But the truth is, while pretty much any person you meet who doesn’t believe in Evolution is doing so for religous reasons, it is important to note that this issue goes far deeper than just religion itself.  After all, the present day Vatican, and even Pope Benedict have a very sober stance towards Evolution.  So this to me, highlights why Paul’s denial of Evolution is such a big deal.

Bookmark To:

 Had this idea before seeing the post over at Crooks and Liars, so here are some questions that should be asked to get some rather interesting answers (and not just of them, it would likely be tough for me on some to answer as well):

• Which matters more: keeping secret classified information or bringing to light illegal practices conducted by an administration?
• Would you be willing to allow the bankruptcy of a telecom carrier if they egregiously violated the law by providing illegal information to the government?
• Would you be willing to prosecute those who allowed torture to be carried out (and much more) by an administration, regardless of political parties or Senate/Congressional co-worker?
• What does the Constitution say about how a war can be declared? Would Iraq qualify under that definition? Also, after knowing what the Constitution says, are we at the Constitutional definition of war?
• Are the prisoners in Guantanamo terrorists or suspects and why?
• Will you be willing to release any classified information if it shows illegalities conducted by a previous administration in order to bring about justice?
• Do you believe that the US has tortured people under the Bush Administration? (find the news article) ABC News received information from the CIA in a report about using water boarding on some of the prisoners within Guantanamo Bay, do you consider the article correct and if so, does that constitute torture? Also, what will you do to bring those who used water boarding to justice?
• Does the US have to follow the Geneva Conventions for any and all types of people or just for limited groups of people?
• What’s the difference in journalism between reporting and stenography?
• If a law was passed for retroactive immunity, whether on torture or warrantless wiretapping, what would you do, if anything, to repeal such a law?
• Do you believe that those in the current administration in the future will no longer be able to travel abroad for fear of being prosecuted for potential crimes similar to Pinochet?
• Will you help to pass a law ending the practice of extraordinary rendition? If not, do you believe that other nations have this right as well? If not, why not?
• Will you publish which people in which foreign nations helped the Bush Administration in its promotion of extraordinary rendition, torture, or other illegal events? If not, why not?

Bookmark To: