There seems to be plenty of critiques of this yearâ€™s presidential candidate websites. Hereâ€™s something I noticed for myself.
While I was looking for Hillaryâ€™s and Obamaâ€™s speeches from last week, I observed that Clintonâ€™s site was smaller than Obamaâ€™s in width! At where I work, we have been targeting 1024Ã—768 for quite some time. Obamaâ€™s site seems to fit that resolution, and Clintonâ€™s, while bigger than the next smaller threshold of 800Ã—600, was considerably smaller â€” about 100 pixels narrower than Obamaâ€™s.
The difference of 100 pixels makes Clintonâ€™s site look just a bit more crammed and busy than her rivalâ€™s. BarackObama.com, by comparison, benefits from the extra white space by communicating (at least to me) a sense of confidence.
So it got me curious â€” I went to the two other remaining candidatesâ€™ websites.
JohnMcCain.com: Black? You really went with black for your background color? Anyway, the screen resolution is even bigger than Barackâ€™s. Guess we know who the real man is!
And hereâ€™s the punchlineâ€¦ Mike Huckabeeâ€™s site targets 800Ã—600! Over a year ago, it was reported that only 17% of all monitors support up to 800Ã—600. It says something about how mainstream this guy is aspiring to get, huh?
Yummy for Obama, crummy for Huckabee! And if Obama and McCain win nominations for their respective party, you know their websitesâ€™ size really mattered.