Offering morons simple solutions to complex issues
Why this constant need on here to blame voters every time there is disapproval of Tory Party policy? Simple solutions for complex issues indeed!
I haven't seen evidence of overwhelming public opposition to the ECHR. I can't recall anyone telling me that the UK should leave the ECHR. Opinion polls that I have seen don't back up any claims that there is huge public support for leaving the ECHR.
Where they do show support for leaving the ECHR it does not appear to be a majority, nor is it hugely different to those backing staying, the "don't knows" tend to a very large minority, and it invariably involves asking a loaded question to get the desired result.
This is a classic and very recent example specially commissioned by an organisation known for its right-wing bias:
People were asked if they would back leaving the ECHR to have better control over who comes in and out of the country, not simply whether they backed leaving the ECHR.
The inference is very clearly that without leaving the ECHR the UK does not have proper control over who comes in and out of the country.
Yet despite this loaded question only 38% said they backed leaving, which obviously means that 62% didn't.
And you can be absolutely certain that the question asked was the one which they believed would show the largest possible number in support of leaving the ECHR. The article even includes a helpful petition at the end for people to sign.
I know a lot of people on here feel hugely morally and intellectually superior to the average man and woman on the street, but how about occasionally not resorting to knee jerk reactions and always assuming the very worse in voters? 💡
From that link:
When people were asked if they’d back leaving the ECHR to have better control over who comes in and out of the country, 38% said they agreed, and 32% disagreed – a net difference of six points.
That 38% is the subset I referred to and its also the subset the Torys hope to appeal to and grow of possible.
If that 38% don't realise that the ECHR might also benefit themselves, their loved ones or society at large, then I can see why their cognitive abilities are called into question on occasion if I'm brutally honest.
I'm most definitely not morally or intellectually superior (deeply average at best) but some mistruths are pretty easy to spot. When more so when they come from a party that has so spectacularly and clearly lied so much in the very recent past.
Just my take on it and I'll freely admit that part of my position is based on a definite and strong emotional element that is hard to exclude.
but some mistruths are pretty easy to spot. When more so when they come from a party that has so spectacularly and clearly lied so much in the very recent past.
The "mistruth" in this case is being told by a reputable pollster, which is very clearly suggesting that the only way to have better control over who comes in and out of the country is to leave ECHR, not the Tory Party. And yet despite that only 38% back leaving.
But it would be right to claim that the Tory Party controls the narrative where these deliberate lies thrive.
How about opposition parties being a bit more proactive in challenging Tory lies and not just always laying the blame on voters?
I know that opposition parties are scared shitless of speaking up about such matters, and instead prefer to allow the Tories free reign, but ECHR is a good example of where the Tories don't enjoy huge public support. If it seems like they do it is because of the lack of opposition.
Why this constant need on here to blame voters every time there is disapproval of Tory Party
policy?
Maybe because the voters are the people who voted in the Tory party? Quite a few times over the last 12 years.
Morons is harsh but not thinking about stuff, playing to media BS, voting for a party that will actually be worse for them and society (i.e. us) would not put an individual as particularly sensible would it.
I can understand why the 5% that the Tory party benefits votes for them but the other large % of votes is always difficult to explain without blaming the voters in some way.
Many /most of those voters have been conned by relentless propaganda.
"The ideas of the ruling class are, in any age, the ruling ideas". A measure of success of this is if you can get someone who originates from the lower orders to argue your case eg Caulfield, Streeting, Cleverly, Reeves.
Maybe because the voters are the people who voted in the Tory party?
Here we go again. At the 2019 election 28% of eligible voters voted for the tory party. That's less than a third of 'the voters', not all of them or a majority of them as your statement implies.
At the 2019 election 28% of eligible voters voted for the tory party. That’s less than a third of ‘the voters’, not all of them or a majority of them
It's true, but people who do not exercise their voting rights are also making a choice, albeit a passive one, and you could argue that 'voters' are people who are actually motivated to vote. Yes, fewer than a third actively voted blue, but the reasons why the missing % made their choice not to vote are complex, and don't automatically suggest a lack of support for the Tories.
In many cases people do not vote because they believe their votes are not impactful due where they live. I live in a very safe Tory constituency. There really isn't any point in anyone voting Labour here, due to FPTP. And even a Conservative supporter may feel there is no need for them to traipse down to the polling station, as the result (at least in 2019) was nailed on.
It would be interesting for pollsters to seek out this absent part of the electorate, and try to find out which way they would have cast their ballot in a compulsory system. I suspect that the missing votes would end up pretty similarly divided between the parties, and that it would confirm a broad mandate for the Tories in 2019, although perhaps not an absolute majority in terms of the popular vote.
Here are 4 very common reasons why people who could vote don't vote:
https://www.raconteur.net/economy-trends/why-people-dont-vote/
None of them suggest that people who don't vote are committed Tory voters.
General election results are a very good indication of support for the Tories, even if they might not include a small amount of vague lukewarm support.
It’s true, but people who do not exercise their voting rights are also making a choice
Yes, but pointing the finger of blame at 'the voters' for being stupid enough to vote in the tories is a pretty daft thing to say when 72% of them didn't vote for them. The only people who can be blamed for the tory govt are those who voted for them, not the other 72%. If we're going to make generalisations about what 'the voters' want then the only thing we can say with some confidence is that they didn't want the tories.
I don't count people who don't vote as voters so it is actually 44% of voters who voted for the tory party rather than your deliberately skewed 28%. So pretty much close to half.
So like I said, 39% of people who are not voting for their best interests or that of society generally. Quite a lot eh....
Looks like the way is being paved for the return of the shagger after the local elections in May...
https://twitter.com/camillahmturner/status/1622559165452283904?s=20&t=8mV99vpm3meCeOrntSTcbA
Out of interest I thought I'd have a look at odds and he's the favourite at 4/1, with Kemi Badenoch not far behind at 5/1
I don’t count people who don’t vote as voters so it is actually 44% of voters
When the facts don't support your argument, just invent others. 🙄
Former 'master of the universe' fails at running small, post-colonial country; delivers further decline in living standards for population.
Previous employer refuses to re-hire him as...he's now proven himself to be incompetent and useless.
Can we stop referring to the UK as small? I mean I know it's not a world power or global empire, and generally thinks more highly of itself than it should, but it's not really small by any metric.
When the facts don’t support your argument, just invent others.
Nobody has invented any facts.
- 44% of people who voted voted Tory - FACT
- 28% of all people who could vote voted Tory - FACT
No right or wrong here, just different ways of looking at it. What we can't do is say how those that don't vote would have voted but one proposal would be to make an assumption they would vote in a similar spread to those that do vote which would not be a bad assumption based on the numbers.
It looks like the deckchairs on the Titanic are due to be rearranged this morning
Liz back as chancellor of the exchequer maybe?
https://twitter.com/guardian/status/1622725880454733831?s=46&t=k9yZfubaNm7AARFwtzy2Ag
Liz back as chancellor of the exchequer maybe?
That would be hilarious. Terrifying but hilarious.
Here you go Liz, try and find that £40bn that you and Kwasi lost just after you came out of your cocaine-fuelled budget overhaul.
one proposal would be to make an assumption they would vote in a similar spread to those that do vote which would not be a bad assumption based on the numbers.
That would be a terrible assumption, and totally ignores the concept of voter disenfranchisement and the reasons that drive it.
Looks like the way is being paved for the return of the shagger after the local elections in May…
A summer of T<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">russ vs Johnson leadership elections would be wildly funny</span>
I think this is my first post on this thread?!?!?!?
I agree with Kerley, those who don't use their vote (for whatever reason) are, by default, 'voting' for status quo as they aren't voting for change. So, other than to point out these people could have an effect on results and dont, cannot be counted in the "X% voted for the tories/labour/free coffee for all" type statements. The only number that matters is the number of those that voted.
That would be a terrible assumption, and totally ignores the concept of <span style="text-decoration: underline;">voter disenfranchisement</span> and the reasons that drive it.
I think we all know how this (my underline) could be changed in the future, and we all know exactly why it wont happen. Basic politics, economics and critical thinking must be taught and from a young enough age to ingrain and male it useful. Meaning the electorate would have the tools needed to make informed decisions and help to stop the disenfranchisement of so many.
The deckchairs haven't just been rearranged, Rishi has created more deck chairs
All in a desperate attempt to keep his potential enemies onside; we now have four more government departments than we did yesterday.
Nobody sacked and yet more right wing Brexiteer loons given ministerial limo's, salaries and titles
Exactly what we the country needs.
Nobody sacked and yet more right wing Brexiteer loons given ministerial limo’s, salaries and titles
Oh they don't need to DO anything!
They can quietly piss away the next year in "setting up the department" and "engaging" and "consulting", maybe with a few dramatic announcements of alleged funding to come while not actually doing anything.
They know they'll all be out of a job at the next election, the main thing now is to look busy, rake in as much profit as possible, fire up all those contacts in business and industry ready for them to be parachuted in as a consultant/non-executive director in a few months time and draw up a long list of what they can achieve if given another chance at the polls.
Creating a Department of Energy Security and New Zero is kind of pointless unless you overhaul all the planning regs too - at the moment you can't build onshore wind, substandard housing/industry is being built all over the place and there's no integrated transport and you'll never get close to Net Zero without a complete overhaul of all that.
30p Lee as deputy chair of the Tory party???
Sweet jebus!
30p Lee as deputy chair of the Tory party???
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/rishi-sunak-to-shake-up-big-bag-of-****s-20230207231334
I occasionally get gobbets from someone close to the action and the most recent was, 'now the culture is very much one of smash and grab.'
Given the total state of the party, the elevation of 30p Lee was surely inevitable and must truly signal the end of days
I agree with Kerley, those who don’t use their vote (for whatever reason) are, by default, ‘voting’ for status quo as they aren’t voting for change.
What if those voters know that nothing will change as a result of their vote and so stay at home? Are they morons as Kerley would have us believe, or are they rational people who can't see the point in doing something that will have no effect?
Everything's relative
We've been here countless times with this ridiculous 'they're all the same' narrative
Unless you're a genuine nihilist (such as yourself), if you can't even be arsed strolling down to a polling station once every 5 years and doing something to make things at least marginally better, than you deserve everything you get
So... in answer to your question... yeah, they're morons
Anyway...
https://twitter.com/AngelaRayner/status/1622968427164958720?s=20&t=G-eUW6XLSKHVwDS8Xc4COw
Big story to be published tmorn in a national newspaper regarding Greg Hands, with a name like that I’d bet on nominative determination playing a factor in the story.
Big story to be published tmorn in a national newspaper regarding Greg Hands, with a name like that I’d bet on nominative determination playing a factor in the story.
I reckon it will be greed rather than lust in his case
as for 30P Lee, I cannot wait to see the ridiculous mess he gets the party into
I reckon it will be greed rather than lust in his case
Greg Hands ‘in the tilll’?
Big story to be published tmorn in a national newspaper regarding Greg Hands, with a name like that I’d bet on nominative determination playing a factor in the story.
Think that was alluded to on the Whip's list previously aired.
I reckon it will be greed rather than lust in his case
He's a Tory, doesn't need to be a case of either/or.😉
Anyway, I'm guessing well get a slew of new policies being announced?
I mean, none of them will happen or have a meaningful budget, just be announced is all.😁
'Nominative determinism'? Is he big into steak bakes?
What if those voters know that nothing will change as a result of their vote and so stay at home? Are they morons as Kerley would have us believe, or are they rational people who can’t see the point in doing something that will have no effect?
Personally I think the people who didn't vote would have been better off if we hadn't had 13 years of Conservative government; in fact I think nearly everyone would, but you (and they) might be right.
Nice to see that Rishi is as shameless as Boris at getting a Zelensky photo op in when the heat is on
Volodymyr Zelensky is here on an official visit, he will be addressing the UK Parliament later.
What do expect the Rishi Sunak to do - blank him? Not allow press photographers to photograph his meeting with the President of Ukraine? Not be seen endorsing him and his visit?
What exactly is your criticism?
The timing was quite handy.
Turning up just before PMQ's
Its not like Rishi is busy the rest of the time. PMQs is the only time anyone actually sees or hears from him
Wasn't the timing so that Volodymyr Zelensky could address both Houses?
Sorry, but 30p Lee. WTAF ?????
I can only hope that when Labour are in power they weaponize these catastrophic decisions in the same way that the Tories used the ' no more money left' note as proof of Labour's mismanagement.
In any other period of history, just having Lee Anderson as a parliamentary candidate should have been enough to call a party's credibility into question.
^^ I could've agree more regarding Lee. The Tories are bereft of talent, ideas and morals.
As for Rishi, ive no doubt Zelensky being here is a welcome distraction but even if the timing is engineered, Zelensky needs all the exposure he can get at the moment what with Russia likely to launch a renewed offensive imminently. That overrides my dislike for Sunak/ the Tories.
30p Lee was a Labour councillor until he defected to the Tories about 4 years ago.
I am not sure why binners originally mentioned him when making the point that the "they are all the same" narrative was false. It seems an odd choice.
