State of The Union address minute by minute on Twitter

http://twitter.github.io/interactive/sotu2014/#p1

by aroch • 12 years ago

104 97 12 years ago

twitter.github.io

alimoeeny• 12 years ago

More than anything it is a self fulfilling prophecy,the more people trust the social media as a source of real time news, the more they (and "social media experts") contribute to the social media to present the news, and it is a double edged sword as well.

larrydag• 12 years ago

This is one of the neatest data visualizations I've seen.

maxerickson3• 12 years ago

It's cranky, but with no explanation of what 'engagement' actually means, it's just a visualization.

(I get that is is some sort of relative keyword frequency;)

md224• 12 years ago

Indeed... it's almost like an fMRI of the national "mind", measuring activation in both spatial and topical dimensions.

Might be interesting to see retweet patterns, to illuminate how sentiment is forwarded through the network.

smoorman10242• 12 years ago

Retweet patterns would be quite interesting. Especially since retweets happen one of two ways. You retweet someone you follow or you retweet something happening in a trend. I wonder if you could separate those two.

taeric2• 12 years ago

Not having scrollbars on the text is... an interesting idea. Also, I see I jumped through several "pages" in my history. Where did I go, exactly?

wmeredith• 12 years ago

Interesting... but maybe not effective for getting people to read your content. I scrolled around with my mouse and nothing was happening so after about 10 seconds I just clicked back.

EDIT: So I went backed and checked it out some more. Completely breaks my back button as they load 20+ URLs while I try to (jerkily) scroll through the text. under ideal circumstances this interface could be really cool, but I found it unusable.

taeric2• 12 years ago

Yeah, I was being polite calling it interesting. And I noticed the same broken back button behavior. When I figured out what it did, I almost edited my post. Really annoying.

andrethegiant• 12 years ago

I absolutely despise when sites do this. One scroll gesture and now I can't go back to the site I came from? Another common archetype for this behavior is sites that show a slideshow. I click through 20 slides, and now I can't get back to the page I came from. Webdevs: you can still have permalinks to each paragraph/slide/whatever without completely muddling the user's browser history! Use replaceState instead of pushState to mitigate this problem.

Browsers should evolve to account for this kind of abuse. Holding down the back button should present two options: One to list all the anchors you've been to on the current page (in this case, paragraphs on the page), and one list of your previous history stack that doesn't account for URL fragments/hashes.

welder• 12 years ago

"And let’s pass a patent reform bill that allows our businesses to stay focused on innovation, not costly, needless litigation."

I really hope this happens.

guelo• 12 years ago

Whatever passes would be legislation that further entrenches the biggest corps. It's the only thing that ever passes congress these days.

zhemao• 12 years ago

They already passed such legislation. And you're right, it is a joke.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leahy-Smith_America_Invents_Ac...

Basically, it moves US patent law from first-to-invent to first-to-file. So it lowers litigation costs for the big guys who take ideas from the little guys and use their big legal departments to file the patent on it before the little guy can.

ultramancool• 12 years ago

That's fine by me as long as those "biggest corps" actually do something and aren't just patent trolls.

Florin_Andrei• 12 years ago

One man, one vote.

One Big Wallet, one heck of a lot of votes.

miggaiowski• 12 years ago

Anyone want to sync this up with a youtube video? Just make it scroll as the video plays.

MrZongle22• 12 years ago

And add the Who's "Won't Get Fooled Again" as the backing music.

smoorman10242• 12 years ago

This is really spectacular. Hat tip to you.

mbell• 12 years ago

I found it interesting that New Hampshire, Vermont and New Jersey seem to be pegged at the far low end of engagement for every paragraph. Bug or lack of interest in twitter/STU in those states?

robotmlg• 12 years ago

There was a New Jersey Devils game on TV at the same time as the SotU Address, so that may explain NJ.

acuozzo• 12 years ago

so that may explain NJ.

I'd argue that it also "explain"s USA.

Zikes• 12 years ago

I'm disappointed that he addressed energy and specifically mentioned natural gas, but did not address the controversial "fracking" method for extracting it.

Considering the high engagement from certain areas of the US at that point in the speech, I'm willing to bet a lot of other folks felt the same way.

maxerickson3• 12 years ago

He did, at least euphemistically. Right after the very first mention of natural gas he said "if extracted safely".

That's about as far as he is going to go if he isn't going to say 'no more fracking'.

unlimited_power• 12 years ago

my back button!?

msvan• 12 years ago

I always find it interesting how different the rhetoric in US politics is compared to, for instance, Northern Europe. It's more pompous and dramatic; certainly more interesting to listen to than what I hear here on a regular basis. Obama's speeches also always have this left-ish air of "we're all in this together!", whether true or not.

But then again, US politics is truly one-of-a-kind in most ways.

rtpg3• 12 years ago

Different cultures, different speech styles. I've noticed a lot of non-native English speakers tend to greatly misinterpret language nuances.

devcpp• 12 years ago

As a French citizen who has visited UK and Germany, I prefer the pragmatic data-based discourse I see in European countries. It's still bullshit but at least it doesn't like it and all the promises are verifiable. I'm not particularly fond of Obama's "I ask rich people to give a bit of money to the poor" and hope that's sufficient. Hope...

Artistry1212• 12 years ago

The UK and Germany may be different but from what I've heard and read about French politics I'm not sure I'd prefer that in any situation over America. Isn't there lots of institutional racism and huge restrictions on enterprise?

sillysaurus23• 12 years ago

That’s why, tonight, I ask every American who knows someone without health insurance to help them get covered by March 31st. Moms, get on your kids to sign up. Kids, call your mom and walk her through the application.

I have no health insurance, and I don't plan on getting it. This is, of course, crazy. But the reason is because I can't afford it. I'm in the same position as many others across the nation.

Under Obamacare, I am going to be fined some hundreds of dollars for not having health insurance; health insurance which, itself, costs at least $200/mo (even under Obamacare). Then next year, I'm going to be fined triple that amount iirc, with increasing penalties each year.

Isn't this the opposite of free health care? I'm not involved in this debate one way or the other. I don't know enough about the issues. But I will say that I don't appreciate the government intruding on my private life, forcing me to buy a product for at least $200/mo, a $200/mo I literally can't afford.

I don't know how this is going to play out, but the government's expectation that everyone will buy health insurance just because they're enacting tax penalties seems somewhat naive. People simply have no money for $200/mo of extra costs. People are also bad at long-term planning, so the impending threat of "next year I'll probably be fined" isn't going to persuade those who are bad at finances (the vast majority of Americans) to sign up for an immediate $200/mo expense.

hahainternet2• 12 years ago

I am not American, but as I understand it, if you earn so little that you can't afford a plan, you can get vouchers to cover the cost. I'm not sure of the specific boundaries and I think it varies per state.

If you detail more information I can always Google.

sillysaurus23• 12 years ago

If I can't afford my lunch after being given so many opportunities to earn it myself, then it would be unfair for me to ask my countrymen to foot the bill. It's my problem, not theirs. I would have an extreme moral aversion to seeking a handout, even if that aversion is to my own personal detriment.

Perhaps I should be trying to maximize every possible opportunity offered to me. But I just can't stomach the idea of taking money away from other people to pay for my own personal problems.

waterlesscloud• 12 years ago

This isn't exactly correct, there's something of a gap you can fall into.

If you earn very little, you might qualify for Medicaid, which is essentially taxpayer-paid healthcare via the government.

If you earn low amounts, you might qualify for various levels of subsidies on private insurance plans through the state-run health exchanges.

However, there are certainly situations in which you may not qualify for medicaid, and still not earn enough to afford a private plan, even with subsidies. There are definitely people in this situation.

This wasn't unforeseen, it was known it would happen.

ensignavenger8• 12 years ago

The subsidies only start after you earn a certain amount of income. If you earn less than that, you don't get any subsidies. Also, the subsidies won't pay for all of it, and the more you earn, the less subsidy you get.

The original plan was to force the States to extend Medicaid (Government provided health insurance) to cover those that would not be getting subsidies because they made too little. The problem was, the Federal Government was only going to float the bill for this for a few years, then it was going to be up to the States to come up with the money to keep it going! Many States balked and refused to expand Medicaid, citing the fact that they could not afford this massive increase in their budget. The Supreme Court agreed with the States that the Federal Government could not force them to expand Medicaid unless the Federal Government was going to float the bill.

So now, anyone that doesn't earn a certain amount of money will be without health insurance, and the cost of healthcare will be higher for them when they do get sick (For many reasons, such as the medical device tax). Fortunately, for now, if you live in a State that did not expand Medicaid, and you would have qualified had they expanded it, you won't have to pay the penalty tax.

aerolith• 12 years ago

As long as you're cool with bleeding to death on the steps of the emergency room, I'm ok with your not having insurance. But expecting US taxpayers to pay for your treatment (indirectly via higher premiums) while complaining about being forced to buy insurance is, at best, inconsistent.

MrZongle22• 12 years ago

As long as you're cool with bleeding to death on the steps of the emergency room

And exactly how common of an occurrence is that in the United States? Yes, one can bemoan the lack of preventative medicine and proper follow-ups, but if you show up at the E.R. of most American hospitals with a life-threatening condition, you're going to get treated regardless of how much you can pay.

If we're going to properly fight the problem, hyperbole needs to go out the window.

Datsundere• 12 years ago

A relative of mine earns around 16k. Family of 3. The result was that he wasn't covered for earning less than 19k.

They gave no tax credits(discounts) whatsoever and took him directly to buy plans for paying the full amount.

There is medicaid but not every state is accepting new people.

ensignavenger8• 12 years ago

This is pretty close to my own situation, and I live in Missouri, which could not afford to expend Medicaid, so no insurance for me. If I do get sick, ObamaCare only makes it more expensive for me!

saraid216• 12 years ago

I actually fall roughly into this camp as well. I can technically afford $200/mo, but I'd rather not. I need to figure out what I'm actually going to do in the next month and I haven't gotten around to doing so.

Isn't this the opposite of free health care? I'm not involved in this debate one way or the other. I don't know enough about the issues.

One of the side effects of not being involved in the debate means you don't realize that the actual "free healthcare" option was taken off the table due to spirited lobbying. On the balance, I'm willing to eat the cost either way (getting healthcare, or being penalized) if it means people who were entirely unable to get it before are able to do so now.

But then again, I'm crazy. Either because I'm nominally altruistic or because I don't have health care or whatever. I'm sure a reason can be found.

I would have preferred to have the dread specter of "long lines" combined with actual free health care for everyone than this, but eh. Politics.

skwirl• 12 years ago

You do realize that Massachusetts has had this system in place for a while now, right? The insured rate went from 86.6% in 2006 to 96% today. The uninsured rate is 3 times less than it was just a few years ago.

On this topic, you can look at real data and not rely on idle speculation. I just don't see a reasonable way to draw the conclusion that "the government's expectation that everyone will buy health insurance just because they're enacting tax penalties seems somewhat naive." Unless you literally mean every single last person.

anigbrowl• 12 years ago

This really doesn't have anything to do with the topic, which is about analytics rather than the SOTU as it affects you.

Angostura• 12 years ago

Where does the money come from when you inevitably fall sick and need care?

gizmo686• 12 years ago

The idea behind the penalty is not to force people who cannot afford health insurance to buy it; your case is an unfortunate side effect. The point is to incentive people who can afford insurance, but rationally say that it costs them more then their expected benefit, to buy it.

mindstab• 12 years ago

The CBC had a great re-imagining of the speech

"The state of the union speech Barack Obama would never give"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/the-state-of-the-union-speech-b...

cookingrobot• 12 years ago

That would be refreshing to hear.

State of The Union address minute by minute on Twitter

Related Stories