I spent most of last night watching the Democratic election returns roll in, with the TV tuned to MSNBC but the sound turned down low, and my laptop in my hands, watching for live reaction and commentary on the event as it unfolded. Twitter, which has now become the web's virtual water-cooler, was my main guide, but while it was fun, I want more. The world live web is arguably already here, perhaps what we need to do is stitch it together a bit better for political events.

Color of Change pushes the popular vote as the Democratic decider; a video of John McCain being asked about a calling his wife a nasty name; Sidney Blumenthal's been sending around Obama rumor emails -- will he blame the "vast right-wing conspiracy"?; The GroundReport and the future of news; bloggers see the momentum shifting Clinton's way; robo-call voice Lamont Williams Twitters; and the Clinton campaign asks supporters to make t-shirts but still doesn't get online community.

I spent a few minutes in the future last night, having a late dinner at an Italian restaurant in Santa Monica with Robert Scoble of FastCompany.tv and Loic le Meur of the start-up Seesmic. Both of them are tech pioneers who are working in the emerging world of the world live web. And when they say live, they don't mean simply the part of the web that gets updated often, otherwise known as the blogosphere and the news-sphere. They mean the direct streaming of live events onto the web, along with live feedback from audiences that are highly networked.

Time to make room for a different point of view on Hillary Clinton's use of the web: The prevailing narrative about the Clinton campaign is embodied in the phrase “top-down,” and there is some truth to that characterization. But if the Clinton campaign is so top-down, than shouldn’t the coverage of the smallest concession of “total control” be lauded by the folks over at TechPresident as movement in the right direction, and more openness encouraged? I would answer in the affirmative, but, largely, the coverage remains negative, at worst, critical at best.

While many political junkies are used to following election results on the TV, with news anchors reporting the news -- if there is any -- in a more or less orderly fashion, many online politics hounds need a quicker fix. Enter Twitter.

In his most recent post, social media expert Stowe Boyd has called out John Edwards' now-defunct new media operation. The problem? When Edwards left the presidential race, he also vacated most of his impressive social media apparatus.

Ronald Brownstein says we're in the midst of the first truly 21st century campaign; Eventful goes local; MoveOn petitions against ABC; Ethan Zuckerman and the Berkman crew watch their favorite YouTube videos; the Village Voice links to its (least) favorite conservative bloggers; a poll of online Pennsylvanians shows a bias for Barack; teddy bear versions of the candidates; and George Bush and Gordon Brown trade Twitter secrets.

McCain does Burning Man -- not; more info on political Twitter spam; the DCCC announces convention credentials for state bloggers; Congresspeople in Second Life; cheesy Hillary video creator runs for Clinton convention delegate; and Clinton as Rocky? Really?

When I spotted one of those campaign trail pieces about Barack Obama's bowling adventures, I shrugged it off as just a product of a slow day. But someone else was apparently paying attention, and posted a very special tweet:

Giving credit to Obama for the uptick in youth voting, and dissing Rock the Vote; the Internet is making it easier than ever to find information about the candidates; Paul Begala revives the art of the faux-Blackberry email; an Avaaz.org co-founder runs for Congress; Stephen Colbert encourages Hillary and Obama supporters to donate to PA schools; Frank Rich hammers Clinton; 10 Downing Street is Twittering, but Congress forgot about their accounts; and two NC gubernatorial candidates engage in an online debate.