Forum menu
Without googling, which party leader do you reckon said this and how would you describe the comment...to be poor in India wasn’t so bad as to be on benefits in Britain, XXXXXX suggested, “because at least everyone else there is poor too”.
?The Scandies offer an interesting current example of mainstream parties coming together to isolate fringe/anti-immigration protest parties
A little bit of research and you'll find a) comments under the original story are giving the journalist a hard time b) the politician in question is saying their words have not been properly represented by the journalist...
I think the point was that whilst poverty is lousy, being poor in a society which is largely richer than you, whatever your absolute standard of living, isn't exactly a picnic in the park.... We are social creatures and we judge our wealth as much by relative terms as absolute
Well for someone who studied Asian studies, her misunderstanding of even relative poverty is quite staggering. Good job she won't be in a position to put her lack of basic understanding into practice.
Bias? Ignorant westerners who don't understand India. Imagine if a Tory or UKIP MP had said the same thing!!
May be she was just sloppy?!?
What exactly do the fringe parties offer beyond (in many cases) fairy tales?
What political party does not do this?
No one expects a party to deliver on what they say whether fringe or mainstream. I agree we dont expect a Lib Dem like pledge capitulation either but they all do this. Greenest govt ever, No top down NHS re organisation - various pledges on deficit etc remind you of anyone?
[THM] The fact that SNP and UKIP are doing well is far scarier since their core arguments are a combination of fantasy and lies......[Binners]Nigel Farage and his band of half-witted closet racists [thm]UKIP/SNP show that many are fooled by and will buy snake oil. There is nothing "real world" about lying about immigration, currencies, debt etc - yes, it may be what some want to hear, but it is just irresponsible nonsense. Protest parties
I have to say your constant desire to conflate the SNP and UKIP does your analysis no service not least when you are speaking about bias. It is also pretty hard [ its impossible I am just being polite] to consider the party in power in Scotland and ahead in the polls to be a "protest" party. Some may even find it disrespectful to a foreign country.
We all know you hate AS , really we do , but do we need to read it shoehorned into every political thread ?
It is also pretty hard [ its impossible I am just being polite] to consider the party in power in Scotland and ahead in the polls to be a "protest" party
I think he means protest as in 'not mainstream'. They were a protest party until recently, and you could argue they still are given that they held a majority but did not win a referendum.on their main issue.
How many SNP voters only chose them because they did not want to vote tory or labour? Academic point really so don't answer.
Anyway, our problem is not one of ideology, it's one of competence.
Three issues dominated the referendum - the protest against Westminster, (lies about) the NHS and (lies about) the currency. So protest and lies sums it up pretty well. Given that most of the rest didn't stack up to any scrutiny the role of protest was abundantly clear and also obvious in the nature of voting patterns. Those with less to protest about voted one way (no) and vv.
Competence and[b] capability,[/b] mol. It's wishful thinking to think that there is a simple and quick solution to the issues facing many developed nations. No government can magic an easy answer - hence temporary fixes dominate the developed world.
I think he means protest as in 'not mainstream'
You cannot be the government and the majority party in a country and be the "protest "party as you are "not mainstream".
Thanks for elaborating on your view of referendum THM. whilst it was,clearly, not the crux of what I was after at least it answers the will we have to read about the referendum on any political thread question.
You still cannot call the party in power a protest party nor compare them to UKIP. Neither is credible
You are correct that temporary fixes dominate but this is due to the need to get re elected. They wont win an election by fixing it over 20 years. The electorate want jam today not next decade so what can the politicians do ?
I think we need this election to hang and give us a chance of getting the idea of PR back on the table. The current system grinds down good ideas left right and centre so the parties can score points over each other. I don't understand why it has to be so polar. Why can't I have a green-right MP if I want - or an anti european socialist?
A lot of the issues faced by government are shoehorned into a left/right argument when there isn't a shred of idealogical tradition.
The current system really does only work for the current Westminster incumbents.
The other option is to replace the house of Lords with randomly selected members of the public.