Election 08′ How do candidates websites stack up?

As 2008 gets off to a start one thing is certain, it’s election time in the U.S. and the stage has once again been prepped for U.S. Candidates to fire nasty ads at one another, argue about invisible figures in the sky, resolve to fix the same issues from 2004, and of course try and appeal to the youtube generation of young voters.

However, for the first time in history this election has the potential to be dictated largely online. During the 2004 election online video and social networking were still in a growth stage. Today, the landscape for communication has changed, especially with younger generations. For instance, nearly every candidate’s homepage contains links to facebook, myspace, youtube, and flickr.

These web 2.0 voting implications have lead me to a strategy for determining which candidates seem well equipped to appeal to online viewers.

In other words, I went to four big name candidate websites, looked over the content, analyzed the usability, gauged the graphic appeal, and determined what sites deserved the “Imulus web development stamp of approval”.

Barack Obama www.barackobama.com

Pros:

• Cream of the crop visual design and color scheme
• Stylish and function interactive video
• State by state election index
• Nice typography (line-height, heading text, and grid layout)

Cons:

• Annoying splash page (Are we back to 1999? Common now..)
• Lack of website search function, this is a no brainer

The lowdown: Barack Obama’s site is the cream of the crop regarding this years candidates. Packing a smooth flowing design, stylish interactive video, and a state by state election index. This is reflected in Barack’s campaign approach, particularly towards younger voters. Barack wanted a campaign funded by the internet-generation of American’s, and he has given himself every opporutnity of appeal with his website.

Ron Paul www.ronpaul2008.com

Pros:

• Nice issue seciton: offering direct quotes from Ron Paul himself on each issue
• No splash page, yay!
• Informative, easier to read web blog (notice the line-height change from the rest of the site).

Cons:

• Text line-height is unbearably low, no person in their right mind is going to spend more than two minutes reading it.
• Lack of website search function.
• The use of Trebuchet as the main web font lacks a professional feel.

The lowdown: Ron Paul has witty and new ideas for our country, and his site should reflect this. Unfortunately the mish-mash feel doesn’t accomplish what his personality expresses.

Hillary Clinton www.hillaryclinton.com

Pros:

• No splash page.
• Straight forward navigation menu
• Easy translation between English and Spanish

Cons:

• Heavily image intensive
• Sub pages don’t seem as thought out as the homepage

The lowdown: Hillary’s site looks nice on the outside but has some major flaws. First off, while her content is fairly descriptive and helpful you won’t be finding it via search. Second, the site is loaded with images. On our DSL connection it took at least 7 second before the page was fully rendered. For non-broadband American’s this site is probably unusable. Still, it should be noted that the visual appeal of the website is decent and in some places the text is fairly readable. Overall the site is close to what I want but just not quite there.

John McCain www.johnmccain.com

Pros:

• Website search!
• Navigation that is fast and responsive
• Straight forward content sections

Cons:

• Frustrating high contrast color scheme
• Cluttered

The lowdown: John McCain is the only of the four websites I’ve looked at that contains a search. And while it is located at the bottom of the page, at least it’s there. However, the color scheme of the site is hideous. It tries to reflect his military history but ends up just creating a high contrast hard to look at interface. Further, the line-height and page text is a bit cluttered. McCain also uses a splash page, which I disagree with. However, his search function, and navigation give him a stamp of approval.