Slashdot Log In
2006 Election Maps Mashups
Posted by
kdawson
on Tue Oct 24, 2006 02:49 PM
from the red-and-the-blue dept.
from the red-and-the-blue dept.
John Fitzpatrick writes, "Search Engine Watch has an article on the launch this week of map-based search tools to follow the 2006 Congressional elections, from both Google Earth and the map-based real estate site HotPads.com. The Google Earth Blog notes the release of two election-oriented layers outlining the borders of the congressional districts and linking to Google News articles related to the different races. And HotPads is offering the 2006 Election Edition. From their blog: 'The 435 congressional districts are outlined on HotPads Maps, with red and blue designating the party affiliation of the districts' current Representatives. By clicking on the districts' "I" buttons..., users can view quick facts about the districts including the current Representatives and the candidates in November's contests. By clicking on the quick facts bubble, users can get more detailed information [from] Wikipedia articles with detailed information about the candidates and the close races.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
OR... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:OR... (Score:4, Insightful)
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2006/Info/hothou
They note one of the (several) Republican write-ins, but ignore someone who is actually on the ballot.
Part of the whole red-blue trend that ignores other possibilities.
Parent
So John Fitzpatric, how much is a slashvertisement (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.inman.com/InmanINF/mris/story.aspx?ID=
Re:So John Fitzpatric, how much is a slashvertisem (Score:2)
Re:So John Fitzpatric, how much is a slashvertisem (Score:3, Insightful)
As for me, I never pay attention to who submitted an article, and usually not to the summary either -- it's immaterial. Either the article stands on its own merits, or it doesn't.
well (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This won't do anything since the people who are normally too lazy to get off their fat asses and vote won't be visiting such sites anyway.
Besides, to quote Bill Vaughan:
A citizen of America will cross the ocean to fight for democracy, but won't cross the street to vote in a national election.
Judging by the way things are, that's not too far from the truth.
backwards (Score:5, Insightful)
I say make it much harder to vote. Make people crawl a hundred yards over broken glass on Sunday night at 4 AM in a driving rainstorm to vote. Then only those of us really fucking serious about the whole business will be making the decisions.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Secondly, the most recent national-level election history has been one of sharp and sudden swings, e.g. from Carter to Reagan/Bush to Clinton and on to Dubya, not to mention the '94 Republican tidal wave, and possibly the Democratic resurgence this year. That makes no sense at all if only
Wikipedia (Score:4, Insightful)
You had me until the "facts from Wikipedia" part.
Anyone remember the last Wikipedia Presidential election fiasco where both candidate's pages had to be frozen because of vandalism? How then would anyone be able to trust the "facts" about the candidates they would read from Wikipedia?
--
Go Where Web Thinkers Gather [webcogito.com]
For Slashdotters who haven't been paying attention (Score:5, Interesting)
In the 100-seate Senate, things are likely to tighten up considerably (Republicans currently hold a majority of 55 so Democrats need to pick up 6 seats to take it back). The only really competative races to watch in the Senate are:
Montana (whre Democratic challenger Jon Tester leads Republican incumbent Conrad burns- whose Jack Abramoff ties are weighing him down),
Tennessee (where Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is retiring, leaving an open seat for Dem Harold Ford Jr and Republican Bob Corker to fight over- this race is mostly tied),
Missouri (where Republican incumbent Jim Talent is virtually tied with Dem challenger Claire McCaskill, who has made this race about increasing the minimum wage and stem cell research- two issues that heavily favor Dems),
Rhode Island (where moderate Republican incumbent Lincoln Chafee is struggling to win re-election over strong Dem challenger Sheldon Whitehouse, who leads him in the polls in this solid "blue" state),
Pennsylvania (where Republican incumbent Rick Santorum is seen universally as the most endangered incumbent in the country, trailing behind Democratic challenger Bob Casey for months now),
Virginia (where Republican incumbent George Allen leads Democratic challenger Jim Webb, but only after Allen's dropped considerably due to racism allegations surrounding the caught-on-video use of the slur 'macaca'),
and Ohio (where Republicans statewide are in trouble due to a series of statewide scandals involving the GOP).
Republicans are looking to pick up the Washington state seat, which they won't, and the Maryland seat, which they also will not (most analysts agree on this). The only possibility for a Republican pickup is really New Jersey (Dem incumbent Bob Menendez vs Republican challenger Tom Kean Jr- corruption is an issue on both sides of this race), where polls indicate that Menendez is leading slightly.
Re:For Slashdotters who haven't been paying attent (Score:2)
I wonder why we need to have the election, then?
Re:For Slashdotters who haven't been paying attent (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Nothing I said was partisan to the least extend. I merely said what Democrats were planning to do once they took back the House. The "First 100 hour" plan has been reported in the press, and there are no serious analysts (either partisan or non-partisan) who believe that Republicans will hold on to control of the House of Representatives this year. If you don't think they will, then you either haven't been paying attention or are in denial. I only gave the bare facts on the Senate
Re:For Slashdotters who haven't been paying attent (Score:4, Insightful)
And anyone who thinks the Democrats are going to become fire-breathing lefties overnight is compeltely insane. They're a bunch of pet rocks -- it's just that at this point pet rocks would be preferably to people stomping on the gas, driving the country toward a cliff.
Can I ask you, in all seriousness why you're still happy with the Republicans? I mean, I can understand why you would feel that an attack on this country merits a strong military response -- but that's not what we're involved in at the moment is it? We're stomping around in a quagmire for obscure reasons that have nothing to do with the 9/11 attack or Al Qaeda, correct?
Or to take another point, I can understand why a conservative would worry about fiscal responsibility... but we don't have fiscal responsibility, do we? How about that deficit, eh?
By the way, I've been meaning to ask some Repubican or other... do you think you guys could return some of the money Enron stole for you? Seriously, how do you feel about your party recieving stolen goods?
(And what kind of "conservative" has such contempt for the Magna Carta, not to mention the Constitution? Aren't they time-tested enough? How can you just shrug off what's being done to central fabric of our country?)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a quagmire to be sure, but I, and many conservatives believe that it was still the right call. I believe that it was the right call,
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The albatross of Iraq is going to be dangling around the Republican Party's neck for as long as amputees and bodybags are co
Meh (Score:2)
time for a new tag... (Score:2)
It's like ebonics for Web 2.0 people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Judging by current polls, I think be believes all you Slashfags are Republican!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)