Ladies and Gentlemen - I give you the Prime Minister of The United Kingdom. I particularly love the tumbleweed pauses as he waits in vain for laughter.
I honestly don't think this idiot would be employed anywhere. Yet he's stood there as Prime Minister making Kermit references while the audience thinks "how this guy became the leader of anything is totally amazing".
With consequences - if none of the above 'wins' then the election must be rerun with entirely new candidates.
Unless of course it's the head of Ofcom where you keep running the selection until Paul Dacre is appointed.
Absolutely nothing, really, because it should be readily apparent to everyone by now that the best candidate doesn't always win. The only thing our electoral processes select for in a candidate is the ability to get elected. Unfortunately, being elected has very little to do with being competent at running a country or representing those who elected the candidate.
A bit of a fallacy, this argument. It possibly says more about how a Government that is addicted to simplism, offering three-word catchphrases that stick in the mind and pull the curtain swiftly closed on the complexity of national and international political issues, has convinced a lot of people to vote for them even though it is against their own interests. It's admirable, in a weird way, and very hard to argue effectively against, not because it's not absolutely see-through but because simplism – like whataboutery – always wins against complexity. There are so many tropes that have just lodged in the minds of people to the point where it's become almost Orwellian. A Government that is currently on the cusp of sweeping tax rises and galloping inflation only have to say: "Labour are the party of tax rises and inflation" and it resonates with a lot of people. They can do precisely what they are criticising the opposition of doing and yet get away with it quite easily. This is largely because issues are complicated and solutions require compromise but as a society we've been coached over decades to think that complex compromise = weakness of vision / lack of ideas.
I would think that an initial measure of an increase in taxation, alongside a host of other measures, increasing benefits, furlough schemes, backed business loans, etc, over the past 18 months and what is planned over the next year or so, all in the face of accusations of doing what a left-wing government would do, at least one Budget to come shortly, and a tailored spending review across the whole of public services under-way right now... ....is a fairly complex example of a compromise rather than any simplism. How the public perceives it is, of course, their problem and is usually a symptom of their lack of acceptance of anything other than a polarised version of events.
I have spoiled my ballot paper over the last decade by doing just that. Drawing my own box for 'A better candidate than what's provided', putting a cross in it. Now I know I technically haven't voted but its my way of sticking a middle finger up and if I had someone who represented me and my beliefs I would vote for them. Although I'm going to stop before I say more as this would be for the Politics section.
I more or less do the same, I’ve always lived in safe Tory seats so generally always vote green party which is tantamount to spoiling my vote, as they’re normally lucky to break 1000 votes. Going back a couple of generations my family were staunch labour voters, but on many occasions during my lifetime they just haven’t been worthy of voting for. It’s all moot anyway because were I live it wouldn’t make a difference. This is why I don’t get some of the partisan views on here, and ‘my party is the best whatever they decide to do’ they’re not your football team, and they don’t give two ***** about you. They don’t deserve your unwavering support and probably laugh at you for giving it to them. Pretending absolutely everything the party you weirdly support regardless of what they do is always the right thing, every time, is just plain odd. I mean what are the odds?
I don't think there is anyone on here that has unwavering support for any Party. I, for example, regularly criticised the Tories for being too soft, too trusting and naive, with poor (even terrible) communication at times through brexit and the pandemic. Moose regularly criticises some aspects of the Labour Party, even if he tends to defend them if anyone else does the same. I think there is, however, unwavering criticism of political parties, whatever they do, as if everything they (or specific politicians) do is wrong. I mean, what are the odds?
ZZ I'm sure many don't care and it may show them nothing but for me I am dissatisfied with the choice of candidates, and the voting system of first past the post. I know it's invalid and does not count towards any of the candidates. However it will be counted alongside other invalid papers and announced in the election votes. If one day these spoilt ballots come out as a fairly high amount, then the government may see the scale of discontent with some voters and adapt accordingly.
I’d accept that I’ll generally take Labour’s side against others, but I’m struggling to recall your criticisms of the Tories since Johnson took over. You’ve become a cultist defending the obviously wrong, like Cummings or Williamson or Brexit failures like your life depended on it.
That is merely because you have chosen to ignore them, I've noticed that you don't even acknowledge them, as it goes against how you like to portray me. For example, I've been very critical of weak Williamson as he let the destructive unions hinder the pace of education recovery. We needed strong leadership, and he didn't provide it, and I said so. But he can't be blamed for a software algorithm that was recommended to him by civil servants as the best way through exam grades last summer, even if he takes ultimate responsibility as SoS. The minor breach of the covid rules by Cummings were just that, as the police agreed. Any damage to restriction coherence was caused by the media and opposition turning it into a major incident. As EnjoyTheGame says, hardly anything is simplistic, or binary, or extreme hyperbole, but the desire for the polarised view on here means that the real subject matter is lost in the vitriol it causes and is why the Politics section had to be closed.
What about the climate crisis? (I know it was partly my fault for going off topic, but others have taken it further away after my flippant comments)
Not your fault, it was started by the GOBE's intention to make it a political thread with his chosen 46 second video. As for comment on the climate crisis, GOBE has given his in the post above, you'll be lucky to get any more than that.
That’s not even criticism of the Government, it’s criticism of your usual foes with a feeble disguise. You really are as transparent as a four year old who has been at the biscuit tin.
