|
|
Post by paulus on Sept 12, 2017 11:48:04 GMT -5
Ha! Not especially as it happens. I voted for Smith in the leadership election - (mistakenly) believing that we needed more center ground Labour to provide a credible opposition. The Tories unopposed never a good thing... However, I was wrong - Corbyn's movement does have legs. So I'm hoping it will rumble on and will vote Labour if they ever had a chance in Bath. In actuality I'm a life long Liberal voter. Was *very* unhappy about the coalition debacle tho, which prompted the Labour membership... And your leanings? |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Sept 12, 2017 11:58:55 GMT -5
The problem with this country is not taxes and public services, it is life long self serving politicians. If an election cycle takes 18 months (30 for president) how do you expect someone to focus on doing what is best for the constituents when they are ALWAYS running for election. 438 of our elected officials have an election every 2 years. Every decision is about protecting their seat at the table, and few if any are about what is best for the country. A lot of really good points in your post. Immediately thought of that famous Billy Connolly quote... Arguably Trump fits your model of service - so not sure that's the full answer. I favour a Jury Service style model - everyone can randomly get called up for a stint. Obviously not without problems either - but it would at a stroke solve the problem of lack of representation. Very best of luck when you decide to run! đź‘Ť |
|
|
|
Post by misternic on Sept 12, 2017 13:47:46 GMT -5
The problem with this country is not taxes and public services, it is life long self serving politicians. If an election cycle takes 18 months (30 for president) how do you expect someone to focus on doing what is best for the constituents when they are ALWAYS running for election. 438 of our elected officials have an election every 2 years. Every decision is about protecting their seat at the table, and few if any are about what is best for the country. A lot of really good points in your post. Immediately thought of that famous Billy Connolly quote... Arguably Trump fits your model of service - so not sure that's the full answer. I favour a Jury Service style model - everyone can randomly get called up for a stint. Obviously not without problems either - but it would at a stroke solve the problem of lack of representation. Very best of luck when you decide to run! đź‘Ť This country (I think) is so ready to change the status quo that they were willing to go the nuclear option (Trump) knowing that he was most likely going to bomb. Problem is the next legit "independent" is getting screwed of his/her chance with each passing month.
Jury Service Style is entertaining. Take the money out of politics, and you minimize the ulterior motives. Many of the US state legislatures pay little to nothing. New Hampshire pays zero except per diem I think. Salaries are not even the issue for nationalpoliticians, but the ways to make money beyond your salary is insane (lobbyist, fundraising, under the table deals, etc).
|
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Sept 12, 2017 14:02:21 GMT -5
Ha! Not especially as it happens. I voted for Smith in the leadership election - (mistakenly) believing that we needed more center ground Labour to provide a credible opposition. The Tories unopposed never a good thing... However, I was wrong - Corbyn's movement does have legs. So I'm hoping it will rumble on and will vote Labour if they ever had a chance in Bath. In actuality I'm a life long Liberal voter. Was *very* unhappy about the coalition debacle tho, which prompted the Labour membership... And your leanings? I'm a 'looney lefty' haha. I regard Karl Marx as the greatest thinker of all time, his scientific critique of capitalism is mind blowing to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Errol1967 on Sept 12, 2017 14:15:51 GMT -5
This is our message from Holland to Trump  |
|
|
|
Post by AFCTUJacko on Sept 12, 2017 16:07:38 GMT -5
In actuality I'm a life long Liberal voter. Was *very* unhappy about the coalition debacle tho, which prompted the Labour membership... Personally thought the Lib Dems were right to go into the coalition (the Tories won that election, and were going to form the government come what may) but they were far too timid once they were in government, and somehow found themselves the scapegoats for decisions that were largely made by the Conservatives, and didn't get enough credit for the stuff they did deliver all because of the utterly stupid Tuition fee promise. Do think they've been trated a bit harshly by the electorate tbh. Compromise seems to be labelled "betrayal" in this country, and at the end of the day, the coalition was virtually communist compared to the right wing monstrosity we have had since 2015.  Don't believe that partisan two party politics is good for anyone (only have to look at the States) but that seems to be where we are going sadly  |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Sept 12, 2017 17:00:27 GMT -5
Personally thought the Lib Dems were right to go into the coalition (the Tories won that election, and were going to form the government come what may) but they were far too timid once they were in government, and somehow found themselves the scapegoats for decisions that were largely made by the Conservatives, and didn't get enough credit for the stuff they did deliver all because of the utterly stupid Tuition fee promise. Do think they've been trated a bit harshly by the electorate tbh. Compromise seems to be labelled "betrayal" in this country, and at the end of the day, the coalition was virtually communist compared to the right wing monstrosity we have had since 2015. Don't believe that partisan two party politics is good for anyone (only have to look at the States) but that seems to be where we are going sadly Not adverse to coalition at all - in fact it generally gives better, more representative outcomes - Germany is a great example of a successful Government in semi-permanent coalition. But was firstly disappointed with the choice - they could have formed a minority government with Labour at the time - much closer in spirit to their base than the Tories. This can be clearly seen by how much their base gave them two fingers next election. Secondly as you alluded to - they were totally toothless once in power - didn't moderate the Tories at all. The depiction of the Lib Dems in The Thick Of It always felt pretty accurate to me  But yes, two party politics is not good. We need more representation. Proportional representation in fact! And that is another thing the Lib Dems sadly had a hand in @!$#ing up. Again they should never have compromised on the watered down Alternate Vote system. It'll be many many many years now before we get another referendum chance on PR... because the result from the last referendum will always be bought up. As a lifelong voter, not exactly a hater - and really thought we were getting there in 2010 - but Nick chose the wrong cup at the end of the long journey to power... |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Sept 13, 2017 1:02:34 GMT -5
Personally thought the Lib Dems were right to go into the coalition (the Tories won that election, and were going to form the government come what may) but they were far too timid once they were in government, and somehow found themselves the scapegoats for decisions that were largely made by the Conservatives, and didn't get enough credit for the stuff they did deliver all because of the utterly stupid Tuition fee promise. Do think they've been trated a bit harshly by the electorate tbh. Compromise seems to be labelled "betrayal" in this country, and at the end of the day, the coalition was virtually communist compared to the right wing monstrosity we have had since 2015. Don't believe that partisan two party politics is good for anyone (only have to look at the States) but that seems to be where we are going sadly Not adverse to coalition at all - in fact it generally gives better, more representative outcomes - Germany is a great example of a successful Government in semi-permanent coalition. But was firstly disappointed with the choice - they could have formed a minority government with Labour at the time - much closer in spirit to their base than the Tories. This can be clearly seen by how much their base gave them two fingers next election. Secondly as you alluded to - they were totally toothless once in power - didn't moderate the Tories at all. The depiction of the Lib Dems in The Thick Of It always felt pretty accurate to me But yes, two party politics is not good. We need more representation. Proportional representation in fact! And that is another thing the Lib Dems sadly had a hand in @!$#ing up. Again they should never have compromised on the watered down Alternate Vote system. It'll be many many many years now before we get another referendum chance on PR... because the result from the last referendum will always be bought up. As a lifelong voter, not exactly a hater - and really thought we were getting there in 2010 - but Nick chose the wrong cup at the end of the long journey to power... At least Vince Cable is here to save the day....... |
|
|
|
Post by joegolferg on Sept 13, 2017 1:56:39 GMT -5
"We'll be discussing our plans for dramatic tax cuts and tax reform. And I think now, with what's happened with the hurricane, I'm going to ask for a speed-up. I wanted a speed up anyway, but now we need it even more so." Donald Trump at recent cabinet meeting. Is he really using a natural disaster to further his own wealth?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 2:14:28 GMT -5
"We'll be discussing our plans for dramatic tax cuts and tax reform. And I think now, with what's happened with the hurricane, I'm going to ask for a speed-up. I wanted a speed up anyway, but now we need it even more so." Donald Trump at recent cabinet meeting. Is he really using a natural disaster to further his own wealth? Yes, yes he is. The fact that this is even acceptable, let alone passable, is puke worthy. Edit: He is repeatedly recycling the lie that the USA is the highest taxed nation on earth to help it along. Even though multiple big companies are the REAL tax dodgers in this nation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 2:45:29 GMT -5
Belittles yet again when he reduces wind turbines into 'windmills'.
Ignoring science yet again. Betsy DeVos would be proud.
Are people really that dumb that we have to think about eagles flying into windmills? (I do know how to answer that question, but I meant it rhetorically)
|
|
|
|
Post by AFCTUJacko on Sept 13, 2017 3:33:12 GMT -5
they could have formed a minority government with Labour at the time - As much as that would probably be my idea of an ideal government, it really wasn't plausible at the time. Either in the sense of parliamentary mathematics, or public sentiment. Labour at the time were a busted flush after 13 years in power, got less than 30% of the vote to the Tories 36 or 37. It just wouldn't have had any legitimacy and would have almost certainly collapsed pretty quickly.
And all history suggests the Tories would have won the re-run.
As much as the Lib Dems made mistakes, that government was far better than what we have now. But I think the publics reaction to the coalition proves that as a country we aren't ready for PR. As good as it would be, there are too many party loyalists on both sides who wouldn't be willing to sacrifice the chance of their party winning a majority, and too many people who simply don't care or don't like change.
|
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Sept 13, 2017 8:11:48 GMT -5
As much as that would probably be my idea of an ideal government, it really wasn't plausible at the time. Either in the sense of parliamentary mathematics, or public sentiment. Labour at the time were a busted flush after 13 years in power, got less than 30% of the vote to the Tories 36 or 37. It just wouldn't have had any legitimacy and would have almost certainly collapsed pretty quickly. I get that argument and Nick said the same when they went into coalition. But look at those numbers; 30% one side, 36% the other - they are not large differences - this makes the argument about public sentiment weaker imho. Weak coalitions can be stable - my guess is the current Tory/DUP deal will keep Theresa in power for another 4 years... And once in power you can work to turn that public sentiment around, with good policies that benefit large numbers of people. As much as the Lib Dems made mistakes, that government was far better than what we have now.
I agree up to a point. Tories on their own are worse. But the real problem was the Lib Dems gave legitimacy to the Tory agenda of low tax, low services, increased privatization. That is in direct opposition to their base's political leanings - we prefer policies that lead to a fairer society. That 2010 Governement was the start of Austerity measures - policies that are now seeing working people have to visit food banks in their hundreds of thousands. Thousands more of our vulnerable dying from lack of essential services and support. Lowest wages in 50 years. Increased tuition fees. And all this pain is only being felt by the poor and vulnerable - there is much greater disparity between the haves and have nots.... And not only did they prop up the Tory agenda, they then promptly didn't press any of their own agenda items at all - famously ceding key areas all together. Loads of young people voted for them on the back of tuition fees - and were betrayed - that's the only word that can be used. What do you expect their supporters to do? Vote that up and ask them to do it again? No, the only handle the electorate have to show what they felt about that was pulled in 2015. And FWIW, I did vote Lib Dems in 2015 - but what else can you do in Bath... |
|
|
|
Post by paulus on Sept 13, 2017 8:26:56 GMT -5
Belittles yet again when he reduces wind turbines into 'windmills'. Windmills!!??! Seriously the man is such a bellend. I see he also doesn't ever want to use the newer term of Climate Change - holding onto the old moniker of Gobal Warming as that's easier to defend against. When NY gets some snow I guarantee it'll be... "Look at all this snow. And they say Global Warming is real!" |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 10:32:56 GMT -5
Belittles yet again when he reduces wind turbines into 'windmills'. Windmills!!??! Seriously the man is such a bellend. I see he also doesn't ever want to use the newer term of Climate Change - holding onto the old moniker of Gobal Warming as that's easier to defend against. When NY gets some snow I guarantee it'll be... "Look at all this snow. And they say Global Warming is real!" They will blame it on gay people. The base are a bunch of loons and believe any concocted story. Gotta love the right wing. They openly state they have the stupid support locked up, yet the stupid are to stupid to see they are being played. I loved the Trump supporter mayor of Tangier Island standing in the middle of his sinking island stating unequivocally that there is absolutely no evidence of climate change. Then there is the residents, pro Trump supporters, who believe Trump will save them. Their religious beliefs will not allow them to believe they are more likely to grow gills before that Island is saved by Trump. It's funny, but it is sad as well. How do these people even function? |
|
