Rating: 
Summary: A PROVOCATIVE HYPOTHESIS
Review: Presents an interesting scenario for politics in America, which if true, means big time changes in our political system. Not all of which may be for the better.
Rating: 
Summary: ....
Review: the vote.com website is laughable, the opinions expressed there are the result of numerous right-wing extremist sites providing direct links to the voting polls- heavily skewing the results. This guy proposes that the world will be revolutionized by the internet. I don't doubt it. He claims that it has the potential to make america a democracy- (whereas before only very tiny countries could be true democracies) there I agree as well- if the path is followed very carefully. The book, however, is an adverisement for his website, and his website is totally worthless. As someone who likes the idea of using the internet as a vehicle for public opinion, he should REALLY consider taking a statistics class sometime. He would soon realize that his methods of sampling don't come close to representing american demographics, and his questions are sometimes quite leading. This would just be fun and games, except that politicians use polls like these to claim that president bush has a 90% approval rating or that the american public is disinterested in campain finance reform. Both are totally false. As an independent, I am quite frustrated by this site. Anyone with a hint of ethics- democrats and republicans alike- should voice their discontent at sites like this that add to the mindlessness of american politics- and push for one of 3 things: 1) big disclaimer that the opinions do not relfect those of the general population (for those with no statistics background that might otherwise be fooled into believing the opinions on this site)- and CERTANLY don't sent these warped opinions to the politicians!!!!! (they say that they do!) 2) change the polling procedure so people can only vote once, and such that the sample is drawn from as random a group as possible. -that means that they can't just let whoever feels like it arrive on their page and vote if they want it to reflect reality in any way, public opinion polls can be accurate with as few as 4000 votes if they have close to 100% response rate and they are sent to a random set of people (even a random set of people with email will be skewed, since more democrats don't have internet access (i.e. the old and/or the poor). 3) shut the site down. my favorite option, since I don't think the author is level- headed enough to follow path #2 : L
Rating:
Summary: ....
Review: the vote.com website is laughable, the opinions expressed there are the result of numerous right-wing extremist sites providing direct links to the voting polls- heavily skewing the results. This guy proposes that the world will be revolutionized by the internet. I don't doubt it. He claims that it has the potential to make america a democracy- (whereas before only very tiny countries could be true democracies) there I agree as well- if the path is followed very carefully. The book, however, is an adverisement for his website, and his website is totally worthless. As someone who likes the idea of using the internet as a vehicle for public opinion, he should REALLY consider taking a statistics class sometime. He would soon realize that his methods of sampling don't come close to representing american demographics, and his questions are sometimes quite leading. This would just be fun and games, except that politicians use polls like these to claim that president bush has a 90% approval rating or that the american public is disinterested in campain finance reform. Both are totally false. As an independent, I am quite frustrated by this site. Anyone with a hint of ethics- democrats and republicans alike- should voice their discontent at sites like this that add to the mindlessness of american politics- and push for one of 3 things: 1) big disclaimer that the opinions do not relfect those of the general population (for those with no statistics background that might otherwise be fooled into believing the opinions on this site)- and CERTANLY don't sent these warped opinions to the politicians!!!!! (they say that they do!) 2) change the polling procedure so people can only vote once, and such that the sample is drawn from as random a group as possible. -that means that they can't just let whoever feels like it arrive on their page and vote if they want it to reflect reality in any way, public opinion polls can be accurate with as few as 4000 votes if they have close to 100% response rate and they are sent to a random set of people (even a random set of people with email will be skewed, since more democrats don't have internet access (i.e. the old and/or the poor). 3) shut the site down. my favorite option, since I don't think the author is level- headed enough to follow path #2 : L
Rating:
Summary: INTERNET POLITICS
Review: This book offers a very exciting preview of how politics will change because of the widespread use of the internet - and the information available through it. If half of what Mr. Morris predicts comes true, we will be in a whole new and exciting world. I hope that he is right!
Rating:
Summary: vote.com
Review: This is the worst book I have read in a long time. The book is extremely disjointed. Some chapters were simply added just to increase the size of the book. The book is a poor attempt by the author to advertise his web site Vote.com. I found few ideas to be interesting, however, they were just that, ideas that took up no more than few lines. Do not waist your money on this book.
Rating:
Summary: The Lost Legend
Review: This is truly an incredible story of how the horse became one of mankinds greatest treasures. It will certainly be the perfect Christmas gift for anyone who loves horses.
Rating: 
Summary: Taking Triangulation to the Net
Review: Vote.com is ostentatiously a book about how the emergence of the Internet will change the political process. It seems that in referring to "Internet voting" Morris has conflated two ideas: informing and campaigning, and actual polling and voting. As to the former, it is undeniable that the Internet potentially has a major role to play in breaking the elite media stranglehold. Finally having uncensored access to right-wing viewpoints is, if you will, a breath of 'fresh air'.
The second point is a little stickier. Touting the power of Web polling sites (such as the one run by Morris himself, mentioned several times), it's not obvious why politicians should pay them particular attention compared to more traditional methods, particularly given that Web polls are notoriously unreliable, self-selecting, and open to abuse. As to actual voting on the Net, glossing over the serious inherent security and privacy issues, it's unclear why the act of voting for a presidential candidate through a Web site would do much to change politics-- except to lower the barrier to electoral participation. But if we don't even trust someone to make the effort to cast his ballot on Election Day, can we trust him to take the trouble to inform himself?
Morris argues that as the Internet has cut out the middleman from stock transactions and travel bookings it will do the same in politics. But it's unclear who this might be, if not our elected representative, and it's completely unfeasible to take him out of the loop. No citizen has the time or interest to engage himself on every possible issue. The whole point of representative democracy is that we place our trust in a proxy. While the Internet may enable us to register our opinions with our representatives, we already have this power through telephone and mail.
Morris does have interesting ideas on the application of the Internet to campaigning, such as the use of political banner ads, pseudo-interactive multimedia sessions with the candidates (along the lines of early-generation adventure games), or the 'Internet presidential debate'. Although banners will be less effective in modifying my own political beliefs since I disable them in my browser, I have to admit that there is something irresistible in the idea of Bush and Gore slugging it out in a chat room. He flatters us by saying that Internet campaigning will be better because we will reject 'negative' campaigning as less interesting. But it seems just a little optimistic to believe that the 'alienated Internet generation' will magically become engaged by all of this technology.
The book isn't too sharply focused, and ventures into unrelated forays that call on Morris' personal experience as a political campaign advisor. These include his thoughts on how Clinton shrunk the Presidency to fit the president, and on what he calls the 'unimpeachment'. The attempts to interpret every recent development in politics to a devolution of power from the mass media to the Internet seem a little strained. Without index or footnotes, this book seems somewhat cobbled together.
Morris may be right in that traditional campaigning will expand to include this new medium. But as to actual voting, lowering the presidential election to the level of voting on OJ's acquittal would do much damage to the solemnity of the occasion.
Rating:
Summary: Taking Triangulation to the Net
Review: Vote.com is ostentatiously a book about how the emergence of the Internet will change the political process. It seems that in referring to "Internet voting" Morris has conflated two ideas: informing and campaigning, and actual polling and voting. As to the former, it is undeniable that the Internet potentially has a major role to play in breaking the elite media stranglehold. Finally having uncensored access to right-wing viewpoints is, if you will, a breath of 'fresh air'.
The second point is a little stickier. Touting the power of Web polling sites (such as the one run by Morris himself, mentioned several times), it's not obvious why politicians should pay them particular attention compared to more traditional methods, particularly given that Web polls are notoriously unreliable, self-selecting, and open to abuse. As to actual voting on the Net, glossing over the serious inherent security and privacy issues, it's unclear why the act of voting for a presidential candidate through a Web site would do much to change politics-- except to lower the barrier to electoral participation. But if we don't even trust someone to make the effort to cast his ballot on Election Day, can we trust him to take the trouble to inform himself?
Morris argues that as the Internet has cut out the middleman from stock transactions and travel bookings it will do the same in politics. But it's unclear who this might be, if not our elected representative, and it's completely unfeasible to take him out of the loop. No citizen has the time or interest to engage himself on every possible issue. The whole point of representative democracy is that we place our trust in a proxy. While the Internet may enable us to register our opinions with our representatives, we already have this power through telephone and mail.
Morris does have interesting ideas on the application of the Internet to campaigning, such as the use of political banner ads, pseudo-interactive multimedia sessions with the candidates (along the lines of early-generation adventure games), or the 'Internet presidential debate'. Although banners will be less effective in modifying my own political beliefs since I disable them in my browser, I have to admit that there is something irresistible in the idea of Bush and Gore slugging it out in a chat room. He flatters us by saying that Internet campaigning will be better because we will reject 'negative' campaigning as less interesting. But it seems just a little optimistic to believe that the 'alienated Internet generation' will magically become engaged by all of this technology.
The book isn't too sharply focused, and ventures into unrelated forays that call on Morris' personal experience as a political campaign advisor. These include his thoughts on how Clinton shrunk the Presidency to fit the president, and on what he calls the 'unimpeachment'. The attempts to interpret every recent development in politics to a devolution of power from the mass media to the Internet seem a little strained. Without index or footnotes, this book seems somewhat cobbled together.
Morris may be right in that traditional campaigning will expand to include this new medium. But as to actual voting, lowering the presidential election to the level of voting on OJ's acquittal would do much damage to the solemnity of the occasion.
Rating:
Summary: More Self-Serving Pap From Dick Morris
Review: You have to give the man credit for re-inventing himself...now as the creator of vote.com, the website which conveniently is named the same as this book. His "ideas" are misleading. His statements are not for the greater good; they are a continuation of his personal hype. How about a negative rating range to show consideration for the trees destroyed when books such as this one are published?
Rating:
Summary: Democracy According to Morris
Review: You will do better reading 'The World According to Garp!' Internet 'voting' will be nothing more than dynamic 'polling', not a Jeffersonian democracy where the people directly determine legislation as Morris envisions. Morris, in Clintonesque fashion, conveniently forgets that we have a republic with representatives empowered to vote. I vote 'NO' on this book.
| 
