Grades are Posted

The moment we've all been waiting for has come to pass.  The 2010 midterm elections are over and the results are in. As always there were winners, losers and the ignorance of the American people on full display.  Instead of critiquing the results though, let's take a look at how the media covered election night.  Needless to say there was a plethora of coverage across all mediums.  For simplicity's sake, I'll just focus on CNN's online coverage.

CNN.com's Election Center featured one of the most informative and interactive platforms for election coverage and analysis.  Users logging onto the site could immediate start learning about why the election mattered under The Basics section.  This section featured stories that explain what the shifting of the reins of power means, why voters should care about elections outside their state and how redistricting will affect them within their own state.

 The Results section could be sorted by Senate, House, Governor, ballot measures and exit polls.  Under these headings users could then choose their state and view any of these results.  The results are presented in interactive info graphics and charts that depict how each county within a state voted.  It also shows the percentage of the vote the winner received based on sex and party ID.

The Polls section displays polls conducted asking questions on a multitude of topics.  These polls can be as broad as nationwide or they can be broken down by state.  All the results are presented in easy-to-understand info graphics.

The Issues section details the country's most important issue according to the people.  It also lists topics such as healthcare, the economy, terrorism and illegal immigration that can be explored to find related stories.  This section also features the option of having users submit stories detailing what they feel is the most important issue and why.

The final section, My Election, allows users to receive personalized news stories and results of local elections.  It is a great way to have users tailor their experience to their own needs.  It's easy to set up and use.

It truly is a shame that more people didn't use all these features that CNN offers.  If they had, they would've become more informed and hopefully made better decisions at the polls.  Hell, it might've even gotten them to go to the polls.  Oh well, there's always the next election, right?

Never Fear, Help is Here

Tomorrow is the big day.  You're no doubt extremely excited to eat dinner and then plop down in front of the TV and watch election results roll in until the wee hours of the morning (or is that just me?).  Or maybe you've sworn off TV.  You'd rather avoid the talking heads and get your results online.

No matter the medium, it can be a daunting task deciding which channel or website to get your information from.  There will be so many to choose from that your head gets dizzy just thinking about it.  Who will provide the best coverage?  Who will have the information the fastest?  It's enough to drive someone insane.

Well you can sleep soundly tonight knowing that Bill Lucey has your back.  The former senior news researcher for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel has written a blog entry on his website compiling all the election coverage that will be taking place across multiple media platforms.

If you're channeling your inner couch potato tomorrow like me, Mr. Lucey has outlined the coverage taking place on all the television networks.  Curious whether CNN will feature their huge touch screen?  According to Mr. Lucey you can bet your ass they will.  Worried that CBS won't have Katie Couric?  Rest assured she'll be there providing up to the minute coverage.

If you prefer cyberspace, Mr. Lucey details the different web resources and tools you can use to get your election fix.  POLITICO will stream a live show, Google News will feature a special section for results and you can even visit the website for the National Conference of State Legislatures for the latest results.

Mr. Lucey's blog is the ultimate resource to figure out your election night game plan.  With it, you have no reason to be scared of the overwhelming coverage taking place.  You should, however, be very scared of the possible results.

Have I Got a Deal for You!

Here we are folks--the home stretch.  We're less than a week away from the elections and I know you haven't voted yet because you want to wait until Election Day (that's the reason, right?).  Maybe you're still hung up on which candidate to vote for.  You're asking yourself, "I've seen all these attack ads constantly, but they just don't tell me any solid information. I wonder where I could go for that?"  Well, stop asking and start clicking!

Introducing the easily interactive, highly informative event of the midterm season: the cooperative analysis of the Senate, House and gubernatorial races by The New York Times and FiveThirtyEight!

That's right folks, in one complete package you can click your way through gobs of information including:

• Which states are either leaning or solid Democrat/Republican and which states are still toss-ups in the House and Senate races.
• Who the candidates are that are running for a particular race in a state. In the Senate race here in Iowa, for instance, we have Democrat Roxanne Conlin running against Republican incumbent Chuck "Pull the Plug on Grandma" Grassley.
• Which candidate is projected to win based on early results/polling.
• What the incumbent's voting record has been on the major legislation since right before and after President Obama took office.  In Iowa we can see that "Pull the Plug on Grandma" Grassley has voted for TARP and against the stimulus package and health care reform.
• Links to their campaign website so you can view their positions on the issues in extremely vague terms.
• The campaign finances for both candidates. This includes money that's been raised, spent, and how much is still on hand.  It also includes independent expenditures as well as the top five industries and top five contributors that have donated to each candidate's campaign.  You can also delve deeper and see a much longer list of contributors by clicking a link.  Do so with caution, however, as you might find something unsettling such as The University of Iowa gave $11,600 to Grassley's campaign and only $6,450 to Conlin's.  So much for that liberal reputation.
• The state's demographics.  Here in Iowa, 90.5% of the state is white, the median income is $48,585, 89.6% of the people are high school graduates (with only 24.2% with a Bachelor's degree or higher), and 23.8% of the population is under 18.
• Previous election results going back to 2002 and you can see the results of the June 8, 2010 primary.

I know you're thinking this is too good to be true.  There's just so much information here, it has to be expensive!  Wrong.  For the low, low price of just a few mouse clicks, some reading and an hour of your time you can become a more informed voter and make the correct choice come Election Day.  Don't hesitate, research now!

Crazy Carl Will Take You Out

Carl Paladino recently channeled his inner 1920s mobster when he threatened to "take out" a reporter for The New York Post.  Paladino, the Republican candidate for governor in New York, lashed out after the reporter questioned some of Paladino's campaign tactics.  In a hasty attempt to justify Paladino's outburst, his aides released a statement saying that The New York Post had put Paladino's family "in harm's way" when it recently sent photographers to the home of Paldino's mistress, taking pictures of the child he fathered with her 10 years ago.

Personally, I feel that Paladino is a Re-thug-lican.  Before this incident, the media reported on racist and pornographic e-mails Paladino sent to friends.  These e-mails included a picture of President Obama and his wife dressed as a pimp and prostitute, respectively.  Some e-mails contained videos of hardcore pornography and beastiality.  Now we have Paladino's death threat to a reporter showing that he's not only a racist pervert but he needs to consider anger management.  This man should never be allowed in public office.

But I digress.

My opinions of Carl aside, I think the greatest thing about this whole fiasco is the fact that it was caught on tape.  It's amazing that our technology has become so advanced that all reporters have to do is whip out their cell phone and press record.  This kind of thing would not have been possible 15 or even 10 years ago.  It opens up a whole new avenue of reporting and eliminates any doubt about objectivity. The tape never lies.

If this had not been caught on tape, I highly doubt it would've been a story.  Since it was, it has become a national story, with cable stations like MSNBC having a field day.  This story will undoubtedly hurt Paladino's campaign, and New Yorkers will definitely read this story in the paper and see it on the local news.  You can also bet good money that Andrew Cuomo, Paladino's opponent in the gubernatorial race, will make this into a biting campaign ad.

Hopefully this inspires Paladino to learn from the old adage "think before you speak."

Senate Race Heating Up in Alaska

In today's print edition of The New York Times there's a story entitled "Dark Horse Emerges in Alaska: The Incumbent." The article is about Lisa Murkowski, the Republican senator from Alaska who, after being defeated in the primary by Tea Party-backed candidate Joe Miller, is mounting a write-in campaign for re-election. This is not easy. As the article states: "The only person ever elected to the United States Senate as a write-in candidate was Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, in 1954."

The article is very well written (as to be expected in The New York Times).  The headline is very creative. When thinking of a dark horse emerging in an election one would be inclined to assume an unknown candidate had usurped the establishment candidate.  Instead, it's the incumbent who is making problems for the anti-establishment candidate who won the primary, turning the whole idea on its head.

The article's lede is well thought out. It describes how at a rally Sen. Murkowski told supporters that there's no word in the Aleutian language for "impossible." Right after this the reporter has a quote from Gary Holton, the director of the Alaska Native Language Archive who said: "It's very clear that you can say 'impossible.' Clearly she wasn't checking her facts." After the quote is the information about Strom Thurmond.  This all flows well in setting up the narrative that what Sen. Murkowski is doing is nigh impossible but she actually has a chance of pulling it off.

Alas, no article is perfect, not even in The New York Times. In this one, the editor missed this sentence: "Now Mr. Murkowski is trying to claim his legacy while relying on a disparate group of supporters to help her wage essentially two campaigns." If Sen. Murkowski can change gender in the span of a sentence, perhaps she can win her write-in campaign.