Box in a suitcase

Samsung is pushing their new phone, the Blast, as an easy way to send text messages. They've chosen to illustrate just how easy it is by pitting it in a duel against a more "traditional" phone.
To represent your opponents in the duel, someone in their marketing department chose two painfully unlikeable Gen-Y stereotypes. I'm not sure why. Apparently, they think Kids These Days would enjoy being berated by a prematurely balding frat boy and a slightly airheaded valley girl.

Once you get past the weird avatar choices, though, try out the "text battle." This is where the concept seems to have taken a turn from slightly odd to actually turning people away from buying a Blast.

The idea is to see if you can text faster than the frat boy or valley girl, using an on-screen version of Samsung's new phone. Naturally, since you're using a mouse rather than actually holding the phone, you're unable to type anywhere near as fast as you might do with your thumbs, and they've turned off predictive text, so every click requires a mental pause while you decide whether to click once or twice for your letter.
Now, I type about 65-80 wpm normally, and I can do a steady 30 wpm on a Treo, Blackberry or iPhone. Trying to use this virtual Samsung, I was hunting and pecking like a novice, while a stressful countdown ticked away and the virtual frat boy grimaced and taunted me. When the time ran out, and I inevitably lost, I was rewarded with more taunting, and the chance to continue the abuse through a half-dozen "battles."

By the third battle, I was bored, frustrated, and completely convinced that a Samsung Blast would be a terrible phone for me to send text messages with. Somehow, I don't think that was the message Samsung wanted to convey when they designed this site.

I have to say, I think a lot of people may be suprised by the way the primaries end up this time around.
Polls tell you what people will answer when you stop them on the street or call them at home. When you actually look at people's behavior, a different picture seems to emerge.

Here are the number of unique visitors to five candidate's sites:

Then look at the money candidates have raised: (source: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/index.asp)

Obama has quite a bit more money raised in this quarter than anyone, including Hillary. The most successful Republican is twelve million dollars behind Obama, his cash on hand is even less than third place Edwards, and he's in debt up to his eyeballs.

I do notice that Ron Paul, supposedly a fringe candidate, has raised the fourth largest amount of any Republican in Q2, and tellingly, he is one of the few candidates who's not in debt.

Finally, I'm looking at the top search terms for presidential candidates (source: http://www.hitwise.com/political-data-center/key-candidates-searchterms.php)

Admittedly, it's just search, but again, I see Ron Paul and Barack Obama right up there at the top. (of course, Joe Biden is pretty high, too, so take that for what it's worth)

I think, if people really vote for the candidates that excite them the most, there's a real chance of seeing Ron Paul vs. Barack Obama in 2008. That would be a fun race, indeed.