There's a time and place for literary nitpicking, and this probably isn't it

[devi]

I'm off out to vote shortly. Just to make sure I haven't missed anything crucial, I had another look at the manifestos of the two parties I've been vacillating between.

Is it wrong to feel more affectionate towards one party because their manifesto is snappy, specific, well-written and has nice fonts and nice graphic design, while the other is full of densely packed, long, rambly sentences of vague upper-manglement-speak that made my head swim?

Never mind foreign affairs, education or the economy! Check out the use of sans-serif!


Edit (back now): And I didn't realise UKIP's logo was a pound sign. Ew, how tacky.

Comments

[juggzy.livejournal.com]

Two things - it takes huge organization to get those leaflets distributed. I've helped with labour mailouts over in Wales, and it has taken a weekend using 20+ volunteers just to get the envelopes stuffed for one mailout to the whole constituency. Independents often just don't have that organization to hand.

Secondly, there are some very good party workers that just don't have the eye for style and presentation or spelling(which I agree can be done cheaply) of other people. Not everyone has the same educational chances, or took advantage of them when they were there. Yes, the parties should probably overview the work, etc.

But I think judging by presentation and style is a mistake, and I don't think, frankly, you can even claim that it is representative.