Content concise, easy to understand explanation on the big issues of the campaign.
Rating:
Gabrieli, Patrick, Reilly
Why:
I was looking for bullet point answers on the big issues with an opportunity to dig down further if I wanted to. Gabrieli did this with his FAQ while Patrick and Reillys issue pages are very wordy and I found myself getting frustrated with the length of their response. My guess here is that Gabrielis background lends itself to PowerPoint style presentations and as lawyers Patrick and Reillys do not.
Community ability to feel and be part of the campaign
Rating
Patrick, Reilly, Gabrieli
Why:
This wasnt even close. Patrick blows the rest away here. His site really gives you the ability to contribute and make a real difference. Reillys is standard fair but actually better than I expected. Gabrieli site seems to have mailed this one in. The volunteer form doesnt even ask what you would like to volunteer for.
Contributions ability to easily contribute
Rating:
Patrick, (Reilly tied Gabrieli)
Why:
Again, Patrick has taken it to another level with the ability to contribute on a monthly basis if you would like. His page also explains why he is asking for employment info and just looks more visually appealing. Both Gabs and Reilly have sub-par efforts here. Reillys links to a third party and is slow to load. Gabrielis is very plain with no explanations and no mention of donating limits. Since I havent yet donated any money yet, I cant say if donations are followed by a nice thank you email (any one have info on this?)
Clarity visual aesthetics (hey, I needed another C)
Rating:
Patrick, Gabrieli and Reilly
Why:
I actually like the look and feel of Gabrielis site a little better than Patricks, but Gabrielis d**n add plays every time the front page is reloaded. It drove me crazy (the same with Reillys).
Overall: Patrick wins with Ok content, good aesthetics and contribution pages and an amazing community section.
I agree with you that Patrick’s plans are a tad unwieldy, though I disagree that the candidates’ backgrounds have much to do with it, since I think it’s unlikely that any of them had much of a hand in designing the websites. More likely it’s just different choices by their various web design folks.
Which webmaster and issues writer will I chose to lead this state? Hmmm…they all put in so much time developing the sites or replicating good sites they had done for other clients in the past…it’s hard to choose which one of these hired guns deserves to run the Commonwealth.
<
p>
Don’t take offense…but, if I ever make my candidate selections by grading websites or ghost written issue papers, please shoot me.
<
p>
IMHO…it’s tiresome to read posts of people who claim to be “finally deciding who will get their vote”…when they clearly decided months ago and their multiple posts reflect their choices…
<
p>
Don’t shoot me…it’s just the way it is….ever notice how “reality” tv has nothing to do with reality? There is a certain reality tv quality to the blogs, too.
I agree. I have been in the software business for while and if for no other reason that it was an interesting exercise for me, I decided to rate the sites.
<
p>
I will say you seem to have a chip on your shoulder about websites. Perhaps it is related to your self-described inability to use this site properly ;)(note the smile and wink which means please dont take any offense Im trying to be funny).
<
p>
However, your assessment that I am being disingenuous about finalizing my choice this late in the election is way off base. I am truly trying to choose between two fantastic candidates (Patrick and Gabrieli) and have not made up my mind. I disagree with Devals tax position ONLY because of the voter mandate. I also disagree with Gabrielis approval of casino gambling in MA and am planning to write a post on that as well.
<
p>
I have never waited this long to choose, so prior to this year I too found it difficult to believe someone could wait until near the end. But wait this long I have. This is a tough choice!
<
p>
BTW – I think talk show in more appropiate than reality TV. See my earlier post on this subject
Okay. I believe you that you are still struggling to make a final choice…whoever thought last February that it would be between Gabrieli and Patrick…I do not care which one of them wins although I think my vote will go to Gabrieli (mind over heart)…If Murray pulls off the Lt. Gov. nomination, I will be satisfied that either Governor candidate will top a strong ticket that can indeed beat Healey.
<
p>
With either Gabrieli or Patrick, there is no advantage to having a woman on the Dem. ticket (unless Patrick wants Goldberg funds) because women who prefer to vote for a women would rather have a woman Governor than Lt. Gov…and now that Healey has modified her positions on Choice and Stem Cell research, women will be comfortable voting for her. (as they were with Weld…Healey is running on a Weld playbook)
<
p>
As for internet websites, I am catching on to the subtleties of blogs…i even rated a posting finally.
Hey Jim, would you do me the favor of posting reviews for these two sites of candidates for Worcester District Attorney facing off in the Democratic primary:
<
p>
Joe Early Jr.
<
p>
Dan Shea
<
p>
I don’t know where you vote, but if it isn’t in Worcester County then your review will be especially valuable. You might even tell us who you would vote for based on the Web sites. For some voters that’s probably all they’ll have to go on.
<
p>
No one will be able to accuse you of partisanship.
<
p>
Why do I ask? Here’s why.
I’d be happy to review those sites based on the criteria I used in the Governor’s race. I’ll have something up by tomorrow evening.
<
p>
What I can’t do is say who I would vote for based on the quaily of their website and my understanding of their positions soley by looking at their web site.
<
p>
BTW – I live in Medford.
I take it you don’t have any preconceived notions about these canditates. The sites aren’t as extensive as the Gov. sites so it shouldn’t take too long. It’ll be good to get some discussion going on down-ballot races. Cheers, S.O.
hanging around local politics here for what seems like forever. He has his supporters and his detractors. I have to say that the liberals are left a little cold by him. He’s certainly not the most articulate individual, but there are some who claim he’s a worthy advocate for fairness.
<
p>
What are your thoughts?
<
p>
BTW, I used to teach at the facility in Shirley. LeGuer had ardent supporters, and many, many totally lost their faith in him when the DNA came back as “his.” We all just chalked up his vehement denials to a psychological denial, if you will. It’ll be very interesting to see how this turns out. People want to trust their guts on these matters, especially those who work in corrections on the other side of the COs, and so many people were dreadfully disappointed on the last go-round…….
That’s interesting. I’ll be curious to see how JimCaralis rates the Early and Shea Web sites. If you want to carry this conversation on over at this diary, I’d be into that.
You didn’t rate the video? Did you leave that out on principle (“bunch o’ BS anyway”), in the interest of brevity, or unintentionally?
I picked what I thought were the top four criteria in the interest of brevity. I think only the die-hards are going to look through all of the video and most everyone will see the ads on TV.
Disagree about only die-hards looking through the videos. I’ve sent many folks who were leaning toward Deval to his blog The Source and now Deval Patrick TV and some folks decide to go with Deval based on what they’ve seen. They like his positive message.
<
p>
It’s all so new though and I think we still have a way to go in terms of using video and services like You Tube to its full potential.
It’s often the video, not the text, and Youtube is showing us that.
But for reasons of brevity I focused on what I thought where the four most important. Most of the video content on the sites are the commercials and most people are going to see those anyway.
I’ve made some simple web sites for several state legislative candidates this year, and in most cases the candidate has expressed their opinion, made requests for changes, and described what they want the site to be like (though usually, they want more than they can afford 🙂
<
p>
As most readers here know, I work for the John Bonifaz campaign as blogger, and also know the webmaster, who I worked with on Jesse Gordon‘s campaign last year. In both Jesse and Bonifaz’s cases, I can confidently say that we have the kind of websites we do in part because of the candidate’s interest in grassroots politics, engaging with the Internet, being accessible, and providing useful information.
<
p>
About a year and a half ago, when the Deval Patrick committee was just starting up and they didn’t have a campaign or a web site yet, I went to their office several times and had a few meetings with some of the people running the committee. We talked, among other things, about how to have a netroots campaign, how to use the web for organizing, what elements are important for a campaign web site, etc. In the time since then, I’ve clearly seen some of what was in those discussions, coming out of the Patrick campaign. I also had a chance to talk to Deval Patrick on a couple of occasions, and I think that again, part of the reason it all worked is that the netroots/grassroots/community vision was both the candidate’s and the tech team’s vision.
is the best that I have seen this cycle. I like the Web 2.0 look, feel and features.