• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Baleforce said:
Voting done.


We get the politicians we deserve.

They chase votes where the eyeballs are, whilst we pay more attention to tweets and tik toks we’ll get the banal simple soundbites.
Click to expand...

The reason Trump and Farage get 'hits' is simply because political setups are stale. Any other business or sport would have rebranded, refreshed, looked at new tech to enliven etc.

As it is, Politics remains largely the same as it was in the 1970s. For all the new ways of thinking and ways of communicating, we have a dusty old setup that perpetuates. We're on a message board that allows voting (or used to !), yet we don't even canvas advisory polls in any systamatic way that would give people more input and ownership. Why aren't Ministries experimenting with small advisory public votes, or hosting debates and small votes?

So much could be done to improve the public experience of government and politics. But there isn't leadership. And spoilers like Farage can only criticise, offering very little themselves in the way of innovation.
 
glasgowspur said:
So which non neo liberal party are you going to vote for?
Click to expand...

Indeed. Both Greens and Labour have strayed from that path. But it's journey and my view is giving Labour the biggest majority possible will be something of a step in that direction. They have a few sensible people in their ranks re state ownerships (Milliband in Environment and Hague in Transport).
 
SpurMeUp said:
As it is, Politics remains largely the same as it was in the 1970s. For all the new ways of thinking and ways of communicating, we have a dusty old setup that perpetuates. We're on a message board that allows voting (or used to !), yet we don't even canvas advisory polls in any systamatic way that would give people more input and ownership. Why aren't Ministries experimenting with small advisory public votes, or hosting debates and small votes?
Click to expand...
Because China and Russia own that domain. Low-tech spares us from malevolent interference
 
Gutter Boy said:
Indeed. Both Greens and Labour have strayed from that path. But it's journey and my view is giving Labour the biggest majority possible will be something of a step in that direction. They have a few sensible people in their ranks re state ownerships (Milliband in Environment and Hague in Transport).
Click to expand...

There isn't any, any politician that isn't up big businesses arse is owned by the WEF or both.
We need a total clear out, from top to bottom.
Two terms of government and your out.
You can only stand for three elections, win or lose, and your out.
You can't vote for the same party in any more than two consecutive GEs.
 
glasgowspur said:
There isn't any, any politician that isn't up big businesses arse is owned by the WEF or both.
We need a total clear out, from top to bottom.
Two terms of government and your out.
You can only stand for three elections, win or lose, and your out.
You can't vote for the same party in any more than two consecutive GEs.
Click to expand...
Personally I would ban political parties. Then vote on a series of personal manifestos from independent candidates in your constituency. And then let that elected parliament vote for its own government.
 
glasgowspur said:
There isn't any, any politician that isn't up big businesses arse is owned by the WEF or both.
We need a total clear out, from top to bottom.
Two terms of government and your out.
You can only stand for three elections, win or lose, and your out.
You can't vote for the same party in any more than two consecutive GEs.
Click to expand...
This is the key point. Who is actually making the policy decisions and to what end, because they are usually not in line with what the populace wants or needs. Corporations and their money set policy now. And they are not even real, just an imaginary construct that we think is important now but will scratch our heads about later while fighting over out of date canned food. .

(worth noting I'm on holiday and day drinking so....yay.... and also the filter on what I say is not as restrained as usual
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
I'd argue the drop-off in ability post Cameron was marked. Cameron and predecessors are questionable too, but like Starmer have a level of intelligence and competence. Pre-Brexit Boris was a clown backbench figure. May wouldn't have been entertained as a leader, and the less said about Truss and Sunak the better!
Click to expand...

Yeah but Hague, Duncan Smith??
Howard slightly better.

Cameron seems to be the exception and even then the bar was significantly lower than Thatcher and Major.
 
Lost Mango said:
Yeah but Hague, Duncan Smith??
Howard slightly better.

Cameron seems to be the exception and even then the bar was significantly lower than Thatcher and Major.
Click to expand...

I don't think I could bring myself to write those words! Something of the night Howard. Sunken Myth and Hague were terrible granted, but still not as weak/incompetent as Truss, Sunak and Boris.
 
Voted green, first time I've ever voted for anyone on the left in any election. I don't even like many of their policies but I like the general gist of their argument and their recognition that major change is needed. I've always liked people who believe in change and have some semblance of a vision even if I don't agree with it.

Starmer will be an OK PM but he doesn't really have much of a plan, in previous elections he'd be more of a one nation tory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back