Jamie Huskisson : David Cameron just lost my vote because of his terrible website

David Cameron just lost my vote because of his terrible website

Posted on March 16th, 2007 in david cameron, discussion, little things, politics

Would it be wrong of me to stop supporting David Cameron not because of his policies (which I largely agree with), but because of his terrible website. Which can be summed up in a list of two points:

Every single ‘web 2.0′ tutorial written by a 13 year old with no clue has been puked up all over the layout
David Cameron hired someone with no previous experience in web design to design a web site for him

Now, with the budgets of the elections I expect so much better than this from (what I hope is) my future prime minister.

I have to say it’s brilliant that Mr Cameron is taking the steps of a blogging online and podcasting. But with a design like that (and coding like that, I must add), it may as well not be online in it’s current state.

If part of the aim is to appeal to younger voters (like myself) via the internet - then the way to go about it isn’t to publish the site using a layout that looks like that. Apart from the raw content and views expressed on the website I really can’t see how the older generation would like this website either.

Edit:

A scaled screenshot of the site, for archive purposes:
Cameron Web screenshot

There are 16 responses to this post so far

Kory Twaites wrote:

Gotta love the “hip” beta tag on the side.

# March 16th, 2007 at 11:34pm
Jamie Huskisson wrote:

We should make it a mission to find ONE site that doesn’t have the BETA tag in or around it’s logo..

# March 16th, 2007 at 11:35pm
Kory Twaites wrote:

We should, but then again. I don’t want to spend ALL weekend on a search for something that doesn’t exist. :P

# March 16th, 2007 at 11:38pm
Connor Wilson wrote:

Wow, I think you might’ve gotten through to him… His website is down now!

Now that would be something…

# March 16th, 2007 at 11:51pm
Jamie Huskisson wrote:

Exciting for a few seconds - but it seems it’s back up.

# March 16th, 2007 at 11:54pm
Dan wrote:

He didn’t mean it to be web 2.0…. he meant for it to be his favorite color :)

(joke) ….. okay bad joke.

# March 17th, 2007 at 12:08pm
Cooper Mor wrote:

Everyone needs to get their panties out of bunch when they see a beta tag. Does it really bother people?

The problem with a lot of the design is it’s not right in context (for a political canidate), but it’s far from terrible. I do think pink was a bizarre choice; my guess is that David tried to make himself too involved in the design of the site.

However, it’s miles ahead of this train-wreck for Kucinich

# March 18th, 2007 at 6:02pm
stu wrote:

Don’t know why you would want to vote for that pillock anyways. But if you want to help send our country down the shitter go for it…

# March 21st, 2007 at 10:40am
Jamie Huskisson wrote:

Stu - what’s your argument for the alternative in Gordon Brown exactly?

# March 21st, 2007 at 12:16pm
Jem wrote:

I lost all faith in Cameron when I saw his *lovely* pants last year..
http://www.jemjabella.co.uk/junk/webcameron.jpg

# March 21st, 2007 at 1:27pm
David Leggett wrote:

The site does not look half bad in my opinion… It’s pretty clear, concise, easy to find the things the user’s interest lies in, etc.

Overall, the design seems pretty well organized and easy on the eyes. It’s not like the colors are high contrast or impossible to read or anything.

Your second point about him hiring someone with no previous experience is sort of a mute point:

http://www.headlondon.com/work.aspx

# March 22nd, 2007 at 3:14pm
Jamie Huskisson wrote:

David - that portfolio just makes me ask ‘how did they come up with that design after all that good work?’

# March 22nd, 2007 at 3:22pm
David Leggett wrote:

Perhaps it is just my experience with those running for different offices in the US. The sites I am used to seeing are truly terrible, whereas this one at least seems tolerable to me.

Example:
http://www.house.gov/deal/

Granted, this guy is running for Prime Minister rather than just a representative, but still… you get the point I’m sure :P

# March 22nd, 2007 at 4:03pm
Stu wrote:

What do you mean the alternative in Gordon Brown? If I was presently in the UK I would not be voting Labour or Tory.

Labour and Tories are practically the same nowadays (traditionally centre right Tories are now bordering on far lefties with our well run present government), vote for one you get the other with it. Seems 80% of politicians these days are the ability to think logically. The only ones with some sense are the un-PC lot who are unfortunately branded racist as soon as they speak the truth.

Agree with you on the website though, doesn’t quite fit the bill for a politicians site does it? One would expect something alot more professional looking. To me it seems they are trying a bit too hard to cater to the younger generations.

# March 22nd, 2007 at 9:20pm
Michael wrote:

Now i know this discussion ended a while ago but… I can see that his website is very poor, from a politicians point of view, but atleast this shows that he is eager to be envolved in his work, and that he feels he should be connected with the people of the UK . This is a muh bigger step than that of Gordon Brown would take. Also the fact that he has tried to targetthe younger generations of the Uk is the best thing possible as alot of children even when they get to 20, and so on, still dont have a clue about politics. So to get them envolved at a younger age is better for the UK as they are the future of politics and the future of our state. Now im only 19 (and studying Politics) and some of the people at the same college as me dont even know the meaning of the word democracy, its completely ridicule that the goverment let it get to this stage, i believe that students from year 7 and up(year 1 for those in scotland) should have a compulsary lesson every week on politics. So that they can access these sites, create a small student parliament for which they can learn more about how it WILL effect their future.
Ill be happy to conclude that his site may be a bit trashy for a politicain but the ideas behind it are far more than what we would think, he would not dampen his own reputation without an established reason behind it.

Id hope you would agree with what i have put or atleast some of it, if not then well cant please all.:-)
I know for well who i will be voting for in the local elections next week and the national election next year, i believe people should vote for what they belive in not what they believe in not for who the leader is, that was for Jem.

# April 27th, 2008 at 11:40am
Jamie Huskisson wrote:

Michael - he’s improved the site a lot since the time of this post and I’m still holding a strong hope that he is our next prime minister come the next elections.

# April 29th, 2008 at 8:48am

David Cameron just lost my vote because of his terrible website

There are 16 responses to this post so far

Add your comments

Latest Twitter

Tags of Interest

Keep on Rollin'