ABOUT CLICKED

The modern news consumer ignores Weblogs and online citizen journalism at his own peril. But not everyone has the time to keep track of what's going on the Web. With this blog we hope to track the highlights of what's being discussed online so when news breaks from the Web, we're ready.

Will Femia is a Weblog enthusiast who, through good fortune and dumb luck, was introduced to the form as his position as chat producer for MSNBC.com careered into obsolescence. On any given day, Will can be found having already spent an unhealthy amount of time squinting at a computer screen.

Send a message to Will at spotter@msnbc.com



Hope votes

Posted: Tuesday, November 07, 2006 11:58 AM by Will Femia

A quick look a some of the election-related links I clicked this morning while they're still relevant.  I'll have a more typical Clicked later today.

I had planned to cover voting irregularities and dirty tricks as reported by blogs today, but looking at the cover stories on our site so far today, that's not exactly a blog secret.  One aspect that is seeing greater emphasis on the blogs is the idea of protecting your vote by knowing your rights.  (This one's a little more formal in describing your legal rights on election day.)

Pouring white-out over polling books?

This dirty trick flier in Maryland is one I didn't see in mainstream coverage.

Speaking of fliers, Andrew Sullivan points to a flier that he interprets as suggesting a dark skinned man raping a white woman (if you vote for Democrats).  I'm not sure I see that in the image.  If I had to read into it I'd say that it's showing the PC interests of dark skinned minorities silencing the voice of the white majority.

Second GOP Firm Tied to Harrassing Robo Calls - The reason this matters is that naming the perpetrators is the first step to accountability.  The second step is firing them:  Indiana GOP Fires Harrassing Robo Call Firm

"Meltdown" appears to be a popular word for what's happening to some of the voting machines.  Brad Blog (which reports actively on the problem of e-voting even when it isn't Election Day) is updating with details.

Has the election already been stolen?

Election predictions abound, but I enjoyed the quickly read list at TBogg.

"Gitcher Lame Election-Day Heds Here!"

Speaking of Slate articles, I also clicked this article about how prison populations play havoc with census data.

Last election, the big news from the blogs was that they leaked all the exit poll info.  This time apparently there's going to be a greater effort to restrain that data.  Or at least, right now there's a greater effort to talk about it.  We'll see how that goes in a few hours.

Olbermann's call for accountability is being well received around the blogosphere.

Speaking of all those robo-calls, there's this suggestion in today's mailbag:

There is a way to fight back the “robo-calls”.  Assuming that the machine does have limitations on how many calls it can make per hour, just set your phone down on the counter and let the recording run its course.  Come back in 3 or 4 minutes and hang up the phone.  Not only has the machine completed its call to you, but it is not bothering someone else during that time.  If everybody did this, it should drastically cut down the total number of calls that the machine makes.
-David

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

To David's comment re. the robo-calls...This is probably the worst thing you could do. For one, its trivial to set up a computer to make dozens if not hundreds of calls simultaneously; forcing the computer to play its entire message only holds up one of many phone lines for the 2 or 3 minutes it takes to play the message - a drop in the bucket when the computer(s) can make so many calls. But the worst part is, when the computer thinks you've been listening to the message it does two things: one, it marks you as 'interested' and two, it chaulks up one more 'successful' call. So not only do you go on the suckers, er, interested persons list, but the company can then present high success rates to potential clients as selling points. That means next year you could end up getting more such calls. Not the best way to stick it to the man.

Mike (Sent Tuesday, November 07, 2006 5:52 PM)

Andrew Sullivan recently noted that he's keeping an eye on the turnout of young voters: http://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/11/one_thing_ill_b.html I think he's on to something. There's a huge youth voter mobilization effort going on right now, and it looks like youth turnout is going to rise for the third election in a row. I work with the Student PIRGs' New Voters Project, a non-partisan turnout effort targeted at young voters, and just from what I've heard about and seen on some of the campuses where we're turning out the vote, there's a huge buzz about this election and students are doing some really creative things to get their peers to the polls. Some early indications from the field: - 321 students have already voted at the polling place at the Student Union Building (precinct 21-17) at the University of Maryland College Park, in contrast to the 149 students who voted at the same location in 2002. - 2006 voter turnout has already exceeded 2002 turnout at two University of Michigan polling places. 256 students have already voted in Precinct 4-1 as compared to 241 in 2006, and 250 students have voted in precinct 1-7 230 in 2002. - 208 students have already voted at precinct 16-A at Ohio State University, as compared to 207 in 2002. - The primary polling place at the University of Northern Colorado has already seen 329 voters turnout, compared to 244 in 2002. - In Boulder, two student-heavy precincts have surpassed 2002's turnout numbers; at one precinct, turnout has doubled, from 51 voters in 2002 to 105 voters today. - In Columbus, five youth-dense precincts near OSU have already seen more voters than in 2002.

James Dubick, Los Angeles, CA (Sent Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:04 PM)

Better way to defeat those robo calls: I got one yesterday, and that was the deciding point on voting against the candidate the call was promoting. Without the call, he had about 50/50 odds of getting my vote (it was a race I really couldn't see a substantial difference in the candidates, for a minor office). After the call, definitely voted against. I hate telemarketers, and think it's horrible that the anti-telemarketing laws allow political calls even if you're on a do-not-call list. Talk about self-serving! Send me mail: no problem. Send me spam or have a computer phone me: I vote against. A personal call from the candidate: depends on what he says, but it's going to be a positive in most cases.

Gus, Katy, TX (Sent Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:27 PM)

Family values are under attack? Would that be the family vaules of preachers buying meth and seeking out gay men for massages and Lord knows what else? Would that be the family values expressed by Congressman taking advantage of under-age pages? Would that be the family vaules of the Phelps church which celebrates the death of soldiers because God Hates Fags? Would that be the family values of candidates who not only abuse their wives but also their mistresses? Would that be the family values of those who accept torture committed in their name? Would that be the family values of those who think it is much better to let those with severe and deadly illnesses die rather than conduct stem cell research? Would that be the family values of those who look the other way while bribery and corruption proliferate throughout the government? Glad I'm not in that family!

Dee (Sent Tuesday, November 07, 2006 6:27 PM)

"Olbermann's call for accountability is being well received around the blogosphere." BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! On DailyKos and MoveOn.org it is. Everywhere else... not so much. Most people don't know or care who Olbermann is... his show (and associated shrill screeds here on DNC/MSNBC.COM) gets about the same viewership as a 7th grade school play. Why you shilling for Olbermann, Will?

Sean, Loveland Colorado (Sent Tuesday, November 07, 2006 7:58 PM)

Sean, I'm sure this is a painful night for you, but the fact of the matter is that Olbermann links are all over the Web (though usually they're the Crooks & Liars bootlegs) and given the unpopularity of President Bush and the war in Iraq, those links are usually in a positive context. They're on blogs, they're on Digg, they're on Reddit, they're on Tailrank, they're on Memeorandum. He has pages of results on YouTube and Google Video results. I'm not going to ignore him just because he's on this site out of fear that someone is going to post your exact comment. Take your cable news ratings pissing-match-in-a-tea-pot back to your echo chamber.

Will Femia (Sent Tuesday, November 07, 2006 11:51 PM)



SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.): 

 Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private)

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://clicked.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=12154