UPDATE: Reviews section refreshed, redesigned, searchable: Go take a look
It also appears he didn't vote in the recent elections.
Another slip up? I'm sure there are some good "reasons" for not getting his voter registrations sorted, but being registered to vote has to be a bare minimum level of competency for the leader of a political party.
Another slip up? I'm sure there are some good "reasons" for not getting his voter registrations sorted, but being registered to vote has to be a bare minimum level of competency for the leader of a political party.
Why? It's not compulsory? Non-issue smear.
Yeah, you're right.... getting people voting, and leading by example, isn't important when you're a politician...
...no, hang on, wait a minute!
Yeah, you're right.... getting people voting,
Not even on my list on what I look for in a politician, YMMV
....he's forgot to become an MP yet too - kind of a biggy if you have country-ruling ambitions! 😀
he's forgot to become an MP yet too
At least that's consistent with not voting.
As for the Greens providing hope, maybe but if they ever got into power I very much doubt they would be able to follow through. Their promises are as empty as Reform's, they are just more cuddly and smell of perfume.
As it is my second "peach" vote was green but now I feel it's wasted if the leader of the national party can't even notice that he hasn't received a polling card and hasn't bothered to wonder why.
Scottish greens are nothing to do with Polanski. completely separate parties
Yeah I was thinking next big vote will be a UK ge.
I'm with Kelvin.
Part of the Green party sktick under Polanski is energising the younger voter into giving enough of a **** to get out there and actually vote rather than heart emojis on socials. I'm pretty sure a lot of what he spouts is froth that's about as achievable as Reform's, but it's froth from a good place rather than the divisive hate baiting bile of Reform so I find it easier to live with. He speaks in a language that is highly relatable to those that have given up on politicians and that's a good thing. Old greenies like me have been left behind a bit with not enough tree hugging but that's another story.
But...and for me it's a pretty big but.....getting the ****ers to actually vote in sufficient numbers to challenge the right wing boomers is the single biggest hurdle. The least you could do is sort your own ****ing admin out to set an example.
He speaks in a language that is highly relatable to those that have given up on politicians and that's a good thing.
Agreed
Adding this here because I honestly do not know which of the threads to add it to... Is it something more relevant here as another example of Polanski not thinking about consequences before he posts to social media, or is it Farage and co griefmaxxing (or thin-skinmaxxing?) on the back of the Widdecombe's murder?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y063yqlleo
Here seems the right place for that one. Although I'm sure it'll get mentions elsewhere.
Is it something more relevant here as another example of Polanski not thinking about consequences before he posts to social media, or is it Farage and co griefmaxxing (or thin-skinmaxxing?) on the back of the Widdecombe's murder?
It can be both, although this looks more like slack checking of content they engage with?
Both.
But let’s not forget that Farage said he’d “pick up a rifle” if Brexit was delivered as a compromise rather than severing all ties. He’s ready to use and incite violence himself.
Is it something more relevant here as another example of Polanski not thinking about consequences before he posts to social media, or is it Farage and co griefmaxxing (or thin-skinmaxxing?) on the back of the Widdecombe's murder?
Honest Bob is presently on Radio 4 pretending to be a human being. The level of faux outrage coming from a party that has encouraged riots involving idiots setting fire to hotels containing asylum seekers is really quite something.
Not to mention where this sits with their 'Free Speech Absolutist' credentials. I'm sure their attitude would be somewhat different if the boot was on the other foot.
Bloody snowflakes! 🤣
this looks more like slack checking of content they engage with
Slack!! More like begging for forgiveness. I mean the insinuation is very difficult to miss ..
I dont use X/Twitter/Tiktok/Instagram/ FB etc .. but this popped up by following the links.
The level of faux outrage coming from a party that has encouraged riots involving idiots setting fire to hotels containing asylum seekers is really quite something.
It is quite hard to sympathise with someone whose actions have made other feel it's reasonable to set fire to buildings with people you don't like inside...
Slack!! More like begging for forgiveness. I mean the insinuation is very difficult to miss ..
Yes, slack, content he was tagged in was either not vetted and someone just mashed a share button. Or not slack and he is potentially and inciting people to murder. I don't know which at this stage as I'm not a ****ing mind reader with a direct link into Zacks head. Or some other conclusion will be reached. Hence the question mark.
Polanski should be held to the same standard as every one else
Arguably a higher standard in this case.
It’s not “whataboutery”, it’s Farage complaining about the use of violent threatening language in politics now, when HE has been central to us getting here. In my opinion he has the blood of multiple MPs on his hands. Many good politicians have quietly removed themselves from public politics because of what he has stirred up. That doesn’t mean other politicians should join in with this, and Polanski has got it wrong (yet again) with his use of social media, in my opinion.
I'm sure it was a fat finger, probably by his social media team or perhaps Zack is just a massive XTC and 18th century French punishment machinery fan but either way the buck stops with him.
It really makes me angry when politicians score own goals like this and allow cretins like Jenrick to sound like the voice of reason on R4
It does I think say something about Polanski that whether it was accidental or not, the sort of SM he is engaging with is not the sort I want my politicians to be serving, of any party. I mean can you imagine Caroline Lucas doing this?
It does I think say something about Polanski that whether it was accidental or not, the sort of SM he is engaging with is not the sort I want my politicians to be serving, of any party.
If only there had been recent example of a politician being forever tainted in most peoples eyes by the dubious people he'd associated with and been linked with in the past?
He needs to be smarter than that, but then he's already showed that he's not very politically astute on a number of occasions. Like Winston said, its coming to something when you've enabled Honest Bob to take the moral high ground
Let's not forget that this same party champions Lucy Connolly at their events. It's hypocrisy of the highest order.
I think that’s a fair argument. I’d also say it’s fair that if someone thinks Lucy Connolly deserved 30 months for her post then Polanski deserves something for his also.
I seem to remember arguments being made that her sentence was so long partially because of the timing of it and how volatile the situation was. To me that also applies to Zack Polanski when a prominent public figure connected to Reform just got bludgeoned to death.
Assuming the actual reporting is correct, he didn't post it, he was tagged into a gallery and shared it. The picture was one of 20 pics, and was 5 deep in the album. So it's totally possible he shared it based on the very first pic only, or skimmed through them and just didn't notice the t shirt. In which case it's a total nothing, "shared not posted" isn't a universal excuse but in this case it just seems to be pitched at people who don't really do social media.
"I couldn't be assed to look properly at what I shared" is a poor excuse. Not that I'm in any way defending that other ****wit.
Just my personal take on this and not picking an argument with any particular poster.
I think it was politically naive of Polanski to have shared that or not have policies in place that prevents others around him doing so.
If the police/ CPS think he's reached a threshold for prosecution then so be it. Ditto if they don't think he has.
I totally agree that Reform and the far right in general embrace hypocrisy and it's one of the many reasons I'll never vote for them.
The parties I would consider voting for should hold themselves to higher standards and this includes the Greens.
"I couldn't be assed to look properly at what I shared" is a poor excuse.
Like I say, one of 20 pictures, and not a very interesting one unless you actually read the tshirt. It's not so much "not looking properly" as "posting stuff just like normal people post stuff" imo. I think it's totally reasonable even that he might have just liked the first shot and not even noticed there was more. And hearing fake outrage from Farage, who thought "I didn't understand what I was being paid to say" was a defence for Up The Ra, makes it more ridiculous.
A political party should be slicker than this but then part of the appeal with the greens is that they aren't slicker than this.
Like I say, one of 20 pictures, and not a very interesting one unless you actually read the tshirt. It's not so much "not looking properly" as "posting stuff just like normal people post stuff" imo
It's not a normal person's account, it's someone's with aspirations to run the country.
It's not so much "not looking properly" as "posting stuff just like normal people post stuff" imo. I think it's totally reasonable even that he might have just liked the first shot and not even noticed there was more.
Share/post that's a fine line. It still appeared on his feed
Lots of "normal" people have to be careful what they post. I got a ticking off for liking a post that criticised my employer years ago. It's not even a higher standard it's just an expectation. You can think it but if you say it it becomes ammunition against you.
Agreed. Amongst a lot of the country's "leadership", there seems to be a remarkable lack of understanding about the responsibility they have and how their actions can be perceived. Almost like they have no clue about things...
It's not a normal person's account, it's someone's with aspirations to run the country.
Calm down, even Polanski would never think he would ever be running the country. That is not his purpose.
Excellent piece on this on the Newsagents podcasts, wondering how Polanski could be so dumb while also wondering how much sympathy can you feel for a leader/party that champion free speech and Lucy Connolly.
Calm down, even Polanski would never think he would ever be running the country.
Still not a normal person's account though. Polanski (or the team around him) seems equally lead-footed as Starmer when it comes to comms, it makes me wonder for how long the Greens will put up with it. This kind of stuff loses supporters - they're a distant third in the Manchester Mayor vote despite having recently gained a MP in Denton and Gorton and done reasonably well in council elections in May (I've now a green Councillor), they haven't turned those wins into anything concrete for the top prize - in one the largest left-leaning northern cities. Fears in Labour circles that they would split the vote turn out to be unfounded, Bev's fist and second votes are about the same as Burnham got previously
Calm down, even Polanski would never think he would ever be running the country. That is not his purpose.
It's an interesting thought. Green Party numbers are going down pretty fast with the latest polls having them back to 8%. Obviously polls are just polls but it feels like the Polanski 'phenomenon' might be ebbing.
But what the Green Party is for now is something I do wonder about. Polanski has stood for parliament in by-elections for both the Lib Dems and the Green Party in the past and he is a member of the London assembly. He didn't stand in the 2024 GE and hasn't stood in a by-election since becoming leader. He has not been able to preform the Caroline Lucas role as party leader of talking in parliament or asking questions in PMQs. He's essentially only relevant through social media content and a hope to get invited to be interviewed on main stream media. He can't really call himself an opposition politician.
They are a political party not a pressure or campaign group. Their aim should be to have some sort of voice at the top table - not that it went massively well in Scotland when the Scottish Greens got the junior party in coalition gig. If you want to be a campaign group, be a campaign group. If you are a political party your aim has to be to hold some power, get on to parliamentary committees and force change either from the opposition benches or as party of a coalition even if you are realistic enough to appreciate you won't be the majority party in your lifetime.
I'm also not 100% comfortable with the direction he's taking them. It's not that he's dropped environmental polices entirely but if you counted up the interview and social media minutes on issues, they have been pushed right to the back of the agenda. It's not that I don't think social change is not important or that it's not interconnected but......I just think they are in danger of loosing their identity post Polanski.
You can think it but if you say it it becomes ammunition against you.
Preface every statement with, "I think..." (maybe 🤔)
Calm down, even Polanski would never think he would ever be running the country.
Still not a normal person's account though. Polanski (or the team around him) seems equally lead-footed as Starmer when it comes to comms, it makes me wonder for how long the Greens will put up with it. This kind of stuff loses supporters - they're a distant third in the Manchester Mayor vote despite having recently gained a MP in Denton and Gorton and done reasonably well in council elections in May (I've now a green Councillor), they haven't turned those wins into anything concrete for the top prize - in one the largest left-leaning northern cities. Fears in Labour circles that they would split the vote turn out to be unfounded, Bev's fist and second votes are about the same as Burnham got previously
I agree that the Greens need to sort their comms out - it is being exploited in the dirty game that is politics and will lose them support. I guess being relatively small, without big funding or backers and without the proper PR or Comms advice and backing that the main parties get, the Greens party were always going struggle in this area; especially as the other parties know that what the Greens stand for is attractive to many people. The only way to fight them is by discrediting them and making ad hominem attacks on Polanski.
If the police/ CPS think he's reached a threshold for prosecution then so be it. Ditto if they don't think he has.
Sure, except this “threshold for prosecution” does not seem very objective in practice.
how much sympathy can you feel for a leader/party that champion free speech
Are you against free speech?
Sure, except this “threshold for prosecution” does not seem very objective in practice.
There's different standards that apply though. There are "freedom of speech" thresholds that specifically apply to politicians. Regardless of what you think about Farage's speech in general, it's clear he's getting legal advice - I'm willing to bet 50p that Polanski isn't (or at least didn't here).
I understand that Polanski has had death threats made against him, and coming straight after Anne Widdecome's murder, I think he should be making more effort to check this stuff.
Can anyone tell me where I can buy one of those t-shirts?
Are you against free speech?
Is anyone?
Yes.....with limits can surely be the only reasonable answer.
Where does free speech stop and hate speech start. I'd argue it's not a nice crisp line in the road......and playing in the road is dangerous.
Using a quote from a recently departed 'much loved' politician that we can't talk about here because we can't play nicely as a baseline.
"Nobody has the right to live their lives being protected from offence or from insult or from hurt feelings. It is an occupational hazard of living in society and if you really can't take it, become a hermit."
Would I be exerting my right of free speech to say 'I think the world will be a better place when Trump dies of natural causes'? Or in the past tense 'I think the world is a better place now he's dead'?
Would it be hate speech if I added 'and I hope that day comes soon'?....or just deleted 'natural causes' from the statement?
For what it's worth I'd say the original passes she who must not be named's test of being offensive and insulting but you have to suck it up, but is not hate. The others would be hate IMO.
Big picture....would you walk around wearing that T shirt? I wouldn't because I think it probably crosses a line despite many probably finding it mildly amusing. I think if your play on life is that intolerance is a bad thing, you've probably lost a good chuck of moral high ground just putting it on.
Polanski - do I think he'd wear that T shirt - no. Is he a twonk for not being careful enough to make sure he didn't leave himself open to this by thoroughly checking before sharing - absolutely yes.
But this is the political party leader who managed to not vote in the local elections because he messed up his personal admin - can we really expect him to be any good at getting the fine details right?
But this is the political party leader who managed to not vote in the local elections because he messed up his personal admin - can we really expect him to be any good at getting the fine details right?
He does make me question the quality of candidates in the Green Party if he is the best they could come up with as a leader, but that could be said of other parties too.
Yes.....with limits can surely be the only reasonable answer.
Wearing a t-shirt and expressing an opinion that we'd all be better off certain evil people were to die is not 'incitement'.
Big picture....would you walk around wearing that T shirt?
Absolutely. I'll put it in the drawer alongside my Luigi Mangione fan club t-shirt.
