Presidential website survey
Nov. 27th, 2007 02:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfsPart of my job as a web designer is to stay on top of the current trends and to try and exploit them. The people with the best money are the presidential candidates, so I decided to look through them.
First up, Tancredo for President. Tom Tancredo is a one-issue candidate: he wants to fit everyone with a GPS Friend-or-Foe system and if you walk across the border, my friend, and aren't pinging as a friend his Terminator will come after you like it did Sarah Conner.
So what's with this website? Look at it! Skip past the splash screen (sooo 2004). Okay, the website is busier than a two dollar hooker in Tijuana. He's got an animated GIF that flicks by scary images fast enough to induce seizures. The wallpaper is scarily subliminal: Tancredo Tancredo Tancredo. (By the way, WTF is the candidates first name, people?) His bullets don't line up with his press releases and news items, there are some really bad typography decisions, and in an era of robust javascript there is absolutely no reason to deploy flash for some of the things he does with it.
But worst of all, our "Defender of America!"'s own head violates his borders! "Borders exist for thee but not for me?" What was his design team thinking?
Mitt Romney. Another splash screen but at least it says something even with Flashblock installed. Better color choices, nicer typography. The postal service Eagle takes you back to the splash page, not the home page: serious faux pax there. A really corporate tool, that Romney: "Mitt Gear," with a catcher's mitt. Not a horrible website, but much better than Tancredo's.
Ron Paul's website looks like that of a man who's already president. A man unafraid to use Web 2.0 colors. A man who can spend money on his goddamned design team! No splash page (thank the Gods). Three columns with solid use of colors to distinguish site points: you know where to put your eyes. Great use of typography, color, and iconography. Only the flashing Flash app detracts from the home page. Ooh, there's a z-order bug in his menu, making it hard to navigate the website. Icky. And that candidate's photo makes him look like it was taken after a night on a bender.
John McCain. Bold. Maverick. Black. With a none-to-subtle silver star in a mililtaresque wingding. Lots of blue, not a lot of red. Good Web 2.0 sensibilities where needed, limited flash, reliable javascript. A thoroughly solid website, but weak on the jingoism we've come to expect from McCain. Is this man not a true American? Still, I like the site, even if it doesn't look campaign-y.
Alan Keys is running for the school board with that website.
Mike Huckabee is back on track, but his home page has poor use of available real estate. (Yo, dude. C'mere. Not even Gramma runs in 800x600 anymore. 1024x768 with a fluid layout for minimization if you need it, okay?) More brave colors. I'm not so sure about the falling-stars logo, and the picture of him makes him look like a contestant on Jeopardy! rather than a presidential contender. There are too many colors on the page, making it look more candy-ish and less professional than it could otherwise.
Ooh, lovely graphic sensibilities in Draft Al Gore!. A strong Web 2.0, even if it is a black site like McCain's. Mouseovers are effective (but slow! Who the hell did their Javascript?).
Dennis Kucinich has a nicely routine website, but he has a major problem: his javascript-based rotating banners don't all have the same size, so the left column jerks up and down as the page rotates! Bad, bad error. On the other hand, his icon usage is absolutely first-rate, far better than Hillary and Ron Paul. Solid use of color. Good campaign photo, but that whole "violating the borders" thing is there (I know, it suggests a dynamic "out of the box" meme).
Barack Obama. Splash page. Lots of rounded corners and softer colors here: a kinder, gentler candidate. Good color use, and good iconography. An excellent website, all told.
Rudy. Surprisingly pedestrian, given the kudos received by his print design team. Really, is the best photo you could grab for the candidate a poorly resized 320x240 still from a TV interview? Oh, it's Flash? Not everyone loves Flash, Rudy. Colors are solid but uninspired. Not the website of a man who really wants to be president.
Mike Gravel. Woah. It's like Web 2.0 Photoshop sensibilities draped over Jimmy Carter's color scheme. Fun, cute, but not campaign-worthy.
John Edwards, after the (*ungh*) splash page: Green? Uh, green? Are you trying to tell us something, Mr. Edwards? Your design team could absolutely learn a trick or two about column headers and layouts from Ron Paul, 'cause that news block in the lower left hand corner completely sucks. Your To-Do list is folksy but unconvincing. The "Important Deadline" javascriptlet is very cute, but the fade-in it causes is a bit alarming. What did you just do to my browser, John? I absolutely loved the Creative Commons banner in the lower left: a nice touch.
Joe Biden (another splash page) has a blog, not a website. It looks like this page was assembled in Wordpress. And sure enough, a close look shows that it was: Wordpress or something very similar, a standard CMS of some flavor. I'm betting Wordpress. It looks like a template site. That's not bad, but it's not first-rate work either.
And last but not least, after the splash page (enough already!) Hillary Clinton is not a lesbian and is not sleeping with that woman, and she has Barbara Streisand on her home page to distract us from the current brouhahah. She reminds parents that she's on their side. Team Hillary has icons for their "things you can do to help" bar, but they're like from Toys'r'Us or something, the kind of icons a mom would choose (hint: not a president!). That said, her color choices are good, the flag is subtle in the background, and the use of red as a standout for "give me money!" make for effective eye-guides.
Final assessment: Ron Paul has the best website, followed by Obama, McCain, Kucinich, and the Draft Gore folks. (It would seem I'm a sucker for dramatic black backgrounds.)
Worst website? John Bowles of the American Nazi Party.
First up, Tancredo for President. Tom Tancredo is a one-issue candidate: he wants to fit everyone with a GPS Friend-or-Foe system and if you walk across the border, my friend, and aren't pinging as a friend his Terminator will come after you like it did Sarah Conner.
So what's with this website? Look at it! Skip past the splash screen (sooo 2004). Okay, the website is busier than a two dollar hooker in Tijuana. He's got an animated GIF that flicks by scary images fast enough to induce seizures. The wallpaper is scarily subliminal: Tancredo Tancredo Tancredo. (By the way, WTF is the candidates first name, people?) His bullets don't line up with his press releases and news items, there are some really bad typography decisions, and in an era of robust javascript there is absolutely no reason to deploy flash for some of the things he does with it.
But worst of all, our "Defender of America!"'s own head violates his borders! "Borders exist for thee but not for me?" What was his design team thinking?
Mitt Romney. Another splash screen but at least it says something even with Flashblock installed. Better color choices, nicer typography. The postal service Eagle takes you back to the splash page, not the home page: serious faux pax there. A really corporate tool, that Romney: "Mitt Gear," with a catcher's mitt. Not a horrible website, but much better than Tancredo's.
Ron Paul's website looks like that of a man who's already president. A man unafraid to use Web 2.0 colors. A man who can spend money on his goddamned design team! No splash page (thank the Gods). Three columns with solid use of colors to distinguish site points: you know where to put your eyes. Great use of typography, color, and iconography. Only the flashing Flash app detracts from the home page. Ooh, there's a z-order bug in his menu, making it hard to navigate the website. Icky. And that candidate's photo makes him look like it was taken after a night on a bender.
John McCain. Bold. Maverick. Black. With a none-to-subtle silver star in a mililtaresque wingding. Lots of blue, not a lot of red. Good Web 2.0 sensibilities where needed, limited flash, reliable javascript. A thoroughly solid website, but weak on the jingoism we've come to expect from McCain. Is this man not a true American? Still, I like the site, even if it doesn't look campaign-y.
Alan Keys is running for the school board with that website.
Mike Huckabee is back on track, but his home page has poor use of available real estate. (Yo, dude. C'mere. Not even Gramma runs in 800x600 anymore. 1024x768 with a fluid layout for minimization if you need it, okay?) More brave colors. I'm not so sure about the falling-stars logo, and the picture of him makes him look like a contestant on Jeopardy! rather than a presidential contender. There are too many colors on the page, making it look more candy-ish and less professional than it could otherwise.
Ooh, lovely graphic sensibilities in Draft Al Gore!. A strong Web 2.0, even if it is a black site like McCain's. Mouseovers are effective (but slow! Who the hell did their Javascript?).
Dennis Kucinich has a nicely routine website, but he has a major problem: his javascript-based rotating banners don't all have the same size, so the left column jerks up and down as the page rotates! Bad, bad error. On the other hand, his icon usage is absolutely first-rate, far better than Hillary and Ron Paul. Solid use of color. Good campaign photo, but that whole "violating the borders" thing is there (I know, it suggests a dynamic "out of the box" meme).
Barack Obama. Splash page. Lots of rounded corners and softer colors here: a kinder, gentler candidate. Good color use, and good iconography. An excellent website, all told.
Rudy. Surprisingly pedestrian, given the kudos received by his print design team. Really, is the best photo you could grab for the candidate a poorly resized 320x240 still from a TV interview? Oh, it's Flash? Not everyone loves Flash, Rudy. Colors are solid but uninspired. Not the website of a man who really wants to be president.
Mike Gravel. Woah. It's like Web 2.0 Photoshop sensibilities draped over Jimmy Carter's color scheme. Fun, cute, but not campaign-worthy.
John Edwards, after the (*ungh*) splash page: Green? Uh, green? Are you trying to tell us something, Mr. Edwards? Your design team could absolutely learn a trick or two about column headers and layouts from Ron Paul, 'cause that news block in the lower left hand corner completely sucks. Your To-Do list is folksy but unconvincing. The "Important Deadline" javascriptlet is very cute, but the fade-in it causes is a bit alarming. What did you just do to my browser, John? I absolutely loved the Creative Commons banner in the lower left: a nice touch.
Joe Biden (another splash page) has a blog, not a website. It looks like this page was assembled in Wordpress. And sure enough, a close look shows that it was: Wordpress or something very similar, a standard CMS of some flavor. I'm betting Wordpress. It looks like a template site. That's not bad, but it's not first-rate work either.
And last but not least, after the splash page (enough already!) Hillary Clinton is not a lesbian and is not sleeping with that woman, and she has Barbara Streisand on her home page to distract us from the current brouhahah. She reminds parents that she's on their side. Team Hillary has icons for their "things you can do to help" bar, but they're like from Toys'r'Us or something, the kind of icons a mom would choose (hint: not a president!). That said, her color choices are good, the flag is subtle in the background, and the use of red as a standout for "give me money!" make for effective eye-guides.
Final assessment: Ron Paul has the best website, followed by Obama, McCain, Kucinich, and the Draft Gore folks. (It would seem I'm a sucker for dramatic black backgrounds.)
Worst website? John Bowles of the American Nazi Party.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-11-27 11:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 02:27 am (UTC)And Bowles' website puts me in mind of the "Nazi parade" scene from The Blues Brothers: "I hate Illinois Nazis." (It also looks like it was coded at around the same time, too...)
no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 02:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 04:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 04:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 06:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 06:22 pm (UTC)Theatrical
Date: 2007-11-29 02:31 am (UTC)Pretty much the only coloration group that works with green light is dark. If you want the character to look any good all, do not put them under green light.
Hence why it drives me crazy at dance clubs when they shine the green lights on everything.
-Michael
no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 02:32 am (UTC)The first 3 were so busy I closed down immediately. The first one even started talking to me without my say-so. If you hadn't told me these were presidential candidates I wouldn't have known (I don't have the patience to navigate a site like that long enough to find out). Sites that busy are almost painful to read.
McCain's was classier. Reminded me of some of the State and County sites. At least there's understandable (and immediately recognizable) drop-down menus for navigation and a glance tells you what the site is for. I liked Keyes' for the same reasons.
Huckabee's looks like he's selling something. Like Penney's or e-Bay or some-such.
I didn't notice some of the jerking problems you noted. But then I'm using a Microsoft OS (would the OS have anything to do with it or just the browser? I browse using Firefox). I wonder if some of it's translation.
Alot of them looked like just plain newspaper sites, with lots of articles to click on. Again, too busy.
Interesting excercise though.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 02:33 am (UTC)I saw the Kucinich bug last week, and found it hilarious but fun to watch for a while.
no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 02:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 03:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-12-01 04:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-11-28 05:42 am (UTC)I've got you beat!
Date: 2007-11-28 05:47 am (UTC)I've got one worse. It's not a presidential campaign site, but a political party site. Nonetheless...
Peruse, if you dare, the Pansexual Peace Party website.
Cover your eyes. ;)
Re: I've got you beat!
Date: 2007-11-28 08:32 pm (UTC)Re: I've got you beat!
Date: 2007-11-28 10:27 pm (UTC)