6 ms·

Well, it would be much better if the article wasn't written by those who organized the efforts. They are likley to be heavily biased towards interpreting the ou

Well, it would be much better if the article wasn't written by those who organized the efforts. They are likley to be heavily biased towards interpreting the outcome positively, especially in a public write up. They could have somewhat alleviated this concern with hard data, but unfortunately they did not do so. For me, it's pretty simple. I don't like it for the same reason that I don't like door-to-door solicitors or activists.

lucideer 9y ago
This is a fair point. I would like to see hard data. While I'm based in Ireland, I do know a good deal of people in the UK who voted and campaigned (and one who ran for LibDems), and we are also quite close and clued in to UK politics here in general. To me, their account seems plausible based on my own anecdotal knowledge of how campaigning during the election went. The youth vote turnout was unprecedented, and there was a lot of people involved in various "weird", innovative grass-roots voluntary political campaigns for Corbyn. In that sense, it felt very Sanders-esque, so the reference to Clinton in the article is bizarre. Particularly given the almost universal, blatant anti-Corbyn media bias. This may also be another reason it seems OK - Clinton/other political campaigns have big media behind them (and large financial interests), so I don't think it would work for them. People wouldn't be as willing to volunteer their time for such an industry-backed cause. Corbyn, like Sanders was very much demonized by the media (tbh, probably worse than for Sanders), so this may seem more like fighting back to people involved (both the senders and receivers of the messages). Point taken on the door-to-door solicitors or activists, but that depends on the cause really too I think. Certainly most people despise commercial door-to-door calls, but I personally do door-to-door political canvassing here in Ireland, which is the norm here and in the UK, and the vast majority of feedback is positive. Nobody minds when its politics.

lucideer 9y ago

This is a fair point. I would like to see hard data. While I'm based in Ireland, I do know a good deal of people in the UK who voted and campaigned (and one who ran for LibDems), and we are also quite close and clued in to UK politics here in general. To me, their account seems plausible based on my own anecdotal knowledge of how campaigning during the election went. The youth vote turnout was unprecedented, and there was a lot of people involved in various "weird", innovative grass-roots voluntary political campaigns for Corbyn. In that sense, it felt very Sanders-esque, so the reference to Clinton in the article is bizarre. Particularly given the almost universal, blatant anti-Corbyn media bias. This may also be another reason it seems OK - Clinton/other political campaigns have big media behind them (and large financial interests), so I don't think it would work for them. People wouldn't be as willing to volunteer their time for such an industry-backed cause. Corbyn, like Sanders was very much demonized by the media (tbh, probably worse than for Sanders), so this may seem more like fighting back to people involved (both the senders and receivers of the messages). Point taken on the door-to-door solicitors or activists, but that depends on the cause really too I think. Certainly most people despise commercial door-to-door calls, but I personally do door-to-door political canvassing here in Ireland, which is the norm here and in the UK, and the vast majority of feedback is positive. Nobody minds when its politics.