Slashdot Mirror
Watching Tonight's Presidential Debate Online
farkinga writes "For those of us that no longer have a television, live TV events can be a challenge to watch. Fortunately, tonight's Presidential Debate has attracted the attention of most US broadcasters, many of whom will provide online viewing options. Leading the way is Hulu, a joint venture between NBC Universal and News Corp, who will stream the Fox-branded feed tonight — assuming they worked out the bandwidth issues that came up during the second debate!"
I'm more interested in a recorded version, since I'll be busy during the actual debate... :/
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I tried during the last debate to watch it on CNN.com/live but it appeared their video player didn't allow Ubuntu/Firefox to connect. After further research, they use some vbscript in their code. I'll definitely watch it, just not with CNN.
I'm an American living abroad and Hulu has region restrictions, so it doesn't work for me. Bastards.
Too bad its written, directed and produced by the republicans and democrats. Its not like the coporate media, who contributes heavily to both parties, will ask any hard questions. There will never again be a third party in the debates. Hardly a non-partisan 'debate'. The last two elections were very likely stolen anyhow. Personally, I can see almost no difference between these republicrats. I hope Donald Duck wins the election. Considering how secure the electronic voting machines are, its not that unlikely.
Try C-SPAN
I didn't want to install some stupid plugins and codecs for other networks, so I just hopped over to the BBC for their live streaming web broadcasts. The little screen is not going to be confused for HD but there were no hiccups or dropouts for the other three debates so far. Why depend on US broadcasters when all eyes around the world are paying attention to the high-stakes face off of US political elections?
[
go to the movie theater. The Alamo Drafthouse Cinema in Austin has been showing the debates. There really is no better way to watch them than to have a burger and knock back pitcher of beer.
Current does a 'Hack the Debate' live mashup of the debates with users' tweets. Anyone can tweet with #current in the message & current puts as many as possible on-screen during the live debate broadcast. I haven't watched it live, yet, but saw some vid of it and it looks really cool.
http://current.com/topics/88834922_hack_the_debate
The New York Times has had the feed online on their front page for all three debates so far (including vp). That's where I've watched them. It's presented in a flash player so it should be cross platform. It's not high def, but it's reliable as long as you've got an internet connection.
Just go to www.nytimes.com when the debate is set to start.
Yeah, but he'd have to start the client at 8:00 anyway. Assuming the feed doesn't exist until then, he wouldn't be able to set it up beforehand either.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
You can get it to work: just use VLC media player
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
and open the video stream:
File->Open Network Stream
check HTTP/HTTPS/FTP/MSS and put in the url http://www.cnn.com/video/live/cnnlive_1.asx
then watch and try not to vomit!
Deconstruct the State
I have TV. I still set my MythTV to record it, and started watching about an hour in.
Why ? So I could use time-stretch to watch it at 1.5X speed. They take forever to say the simplest thing.
Time stretch is amazing. Get done in less time, without everyone sounding like chipmunks.
My MythTV box died a while ago and that time-stretch feature is by far the number one thing that I miss. I am going to replace my MythTV box just for that. I'm not aware of any other DVR that does that. It's an awesome little feature. The debates would have been so much more interesting in time-stretch.
[signature]
MSNBC also will have a live stream. I suspect Fox News will, too, for those with a more conservative leaning,...
ACORN is bothering to check. The problem is that once someone hands in a bogus registration form to them, they are legally obliged to hand it in. What they do, which is absolutely the right thing to do, is mark it as likely problematic.
A couple of good links on the subject: This explains what's going on in detail, in terms of ACORN's responsibilities. And this is a memo from ACORN that explains their side in detail. The bottom line is that ACORN has absolutely no incentive to hand in bogus registrations. They will not (without an enormous amount of effort at disguise rarely seen outside of Hollywood) enable people to vote illegally. They undermine the ability of voter registration offices to process legitimate registrations, which the vast majority of ACORN-processed registrations are. ACORN's reputation is tarnished despite the fact they're legally required to hand in the registrations despite not originating them. And ACORN's own efforts to flag suspect registrations pretty much sink the "ACORN is involved in a conspiracy" meme - why the hell flag them if you want them accepted?
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
You're forgetting the fact that the President doesn't specifically change anything in this country. Congress does. The President can beg and plead and try to influence, but the economy has nothing to do with W's policies...as bad or weak as they may be. Remember the days of congressional deadlock. That was because the two congresses couldn't pass anything between each other. Didn't matter what the President wanted. He couldn't get it if congress doesn't want it. What we are voting for is a concept of leadership. The Pres will hopefully communicate as best as he can what direction he thinks would be good. Congress can ultimately say "screw you" and do whatever they want. Pres can veto, but Congress can overturn. Ultimate power in the country is congress.
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
"American" means "of the Americas". Anybody living on the continents of North or South America could rightly call themselves "American".
"USian" is probably not the best term to use, but it's a damn sight more accurate than "American".
In my country (Uruguay), we regularly do refer to ourselves as "Americanos" (American in Spanish).
:)
When somebody calls himself an "American" in English we understand what they mean, but in Spanish we call them "Estadounidenses" - which should be translated to USian
and even then it could be a bit of a misnomer (Brazil for example is United States of Brazil, etc...)
There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.