Metropol

all new Phil wrote:I think it will do more harm than good. More people find Russell Brand repulsive than like him.

Probably correlates quite strongly with people who do vote and vote Tory I'd have thought.

In any case, one shouldn't dislike somebody because they were interviewed by somebody else you dislike. By that token I'd hate all the political leaders because I can't stand Evan Davies.

all new Phil wrote:I think it will do more harm than good. More people find Russell Brand repulsive than like him.

Brand however resonates with those who have more left/socialist values, some who may vote Labour.

I can't imagine it will affect the vote that much. Brand's current shtick is telling people strictly not to vote - so even if the interview did persuade those people to vote Labour, we've already passed the registration deadline for it to make that much of a difference.

Philip wrote:I can't imagine it will affect the vote that much. Brand's current shtick is telling people strictly not to vote - so even if the interview did persuade those people to vote Labour, we've already passed the registration deadline for it to make that much of a difference.

Inclusion on the electoral roll isn't optional - if you want any credit product of any sort it's pretty damn important that you're registered. There will be plenty of non-voters who are registered for whatever reason.

WillPS wrote:

Philip wrote:I can't imagine it will affect the vote that much. Brand's current shtick is telling people strictly not to vote - so even if the interview did persuade those people to vote Labour, we've already passed the registration deadline for it to make that much of a difference.

Inclusion on the electoral roll isn't optional - if you want any credit product of any sort it's pretty damn important that you're registered. There will be plenty of non-voters who are registered for whatever reason.

Yes - I was automatically included on the electoral roll when my parents were asked if there was anyone turning 18 in the household, for example - but there was a huge push a few weeks ago to get young people to register (well, on Twitter at least). This young audience is presumably what they're trying to get by doing the Brand interview.

In any case, I don't think you can make them change their minds that easily, but who knows. Personally I think it was a good idea, in terms of engaging his audience with politics.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32514019
Whoops. Hull East postal voters can't vote for Labour (the incumbent) or the Greens. They were omitted from the paper by mistake. They're being reprinted, but now some voters won't get their votes in on time. After all, if they had a postal vote they probably did so for a reason. Holiday, working hours, sickness.

Philip wrote:

WillPS wrote:

Philip wrote:I can't imagine it will affect the vote that much. Brand's current shtick is telling people strictly not to vote - so even if the interview did persuade those people to vote Labour, we've already passed the registration deadline for it to make that much of a difference.

Inclusion on the electoral roll isn't optional - if you want any credit product of any sort it's pretty damn important that you're registered. There will be plenty of non-voters who are registered for whatever reason.

Yes - I was automatically included on the electoral roll when my parents were asked if there was anyone turning 18 in the household, for example - but there was a huge push a few weeks ago to get young people to register (well, on Twitter at least). This young audience is presumably what they're trying to get by doing the Brand interview.

In any case, I don't think you can make them change their minds that easily, but who knows. Personally I think it was a good idea, in terms of engaging his audience with politics.

Household registration is being phased out, hence the big push from some circles to get people to register.

bilky asko wrote:Household registration is being phased out, hence the big push from some circles to get people to register.

Ah, that explains it. Thanks.

I wish David C would SHUT is dam mouth about that stupid note " we have no money left" Crumbs its clear he sweeped the 1964 TORY note to the incoming labour government, saying the same thing...

barcode wrote:I wish David C would SHUT is dam mouth about that stupid note " we have no money left" Crumbs its clear he sweeped the 1964 TORY note to the incoming labour government, saying the same thing...

But like it or not, it's the justification for the whole narrative of the last parliament.

all new Phil wrote:

barcode wrote:I wish David C would SHUT is dam mouth about that stupid note " we have no money left" Crumbs its clear he sweeped the 1964 TORY note to the incoming labour government, saying the same thing...

But like it or not, it's the justification for the whole narrative of the last parliament.

Yet when the tories left office in 1964 there left the country with no money, its pot calling the kettle black. Maybe we should have never saved the banks.