A jerk with a good website

Don't ask why I was browsing GeorgeWBush.com but I did. I'm neither fan nor hater.

To the point, his campaign website is pretty good I must admit. I can find several usability errors (the gravest is that you can't see what links you've already visited and that some JavaScripts simply don't work), but let's see beyond that for now. All information is in your face with well chosen images and good choice of colours. Text is easy to read and articles have matching related content. The tabbed agenda is really nice too (I actually never read any of it but I clicked a lot). And when a page is not found a clear sitemap comes up. Maybe I'll set one similar up for me website.

Compare it to Howard Deans, which has some nice features, but is not nearly as good as George W's.

My guess is that this really matters. It still doesn't matter as much as speeches on national television or scapegoating tv adverts but I'm sure having a informative website will shift the voting results in numbers of millions.

As a professional web developer I'm glade to see that the effort is being made. It must be said that the logo could need some work. In fact, there seems to be two different logos. Is one just for the website?