Coronavirus Thread (Off Topic, Politics) (72 Viewers)

[Astute]

I don't think there are many things you don't know all about judging from your posts.

Please tell me more. Not my fault I know more than yourself as you don't seem to know about people like Sultana and are happy to argue the point without checking.

 

---

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I have had my results back after seven days and I am positive

Sorry to hear that. Look after yourself and I hope it's only mild.

 

[Astute]

Yes, oh for the good old days when old white men rules the waves.

Were politics better then? Why the sudden change?

 

[Astute]

He's named one person and used her to somehow prove that the entire country's leaders are selected on the basis of 'ticking boxes', not exactly overwhelming evidence to be honest.

Ah so she is the only one. Strange hiw you defend certain people.

Take a look. You will be shocked if you really don't know. Look at how many get selected and then deselected when the truth comes out. And it is from all parties. I chose Sultana as she is now in Coventry.

And where did I say leaders?

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Sultana has improved a lot. She was still on shouty activist mode at first but she’s toned that down a lot and comments on local issues more. I’ve been more impressed with the other woman who’s name escapes me right now though.

There were a lot of unhappy people, myself included, at exactly how marginal a safe seat had become. Hard to say how much of that was down to the candidate and how much down to general crap campaign organisation nationally and changing demographics though. Mattie Haven the Con candidate is a local councillor and from what I’ve seen works very hard locally so was a good opponent.

Yeah, there's always a certain resentment when people get parachuted in, with limited knowledge of local issues. At the end of the day, you're voting for an MP to represent you locally as well (a flaw *and* benefit of the system!). If you compare the margins to Colleen Fletcher's seat (and I wouldn't put her up as an especially outstanding MP!) then it's criminal how close they came to losing them.

 

[shmmeee]

The problem is politics were much better when it was those who served the best got elected. Once the question was asked on why were most MP's white males it suddenly changed. That meant that if the best candidate was a white male it could go elsewhere. No problem of gender, race, sexual orientation or whatever being chosen as long as it is the best person fir the job. But isn't it strange that the big change in the type of MP we have also coincided with the massive downgrade in quality of MP's we now have.

It’s a hypothesis I’ll give you that, but it’s only really been one party used sparingly so not sure it can explain away the drop in quality. You’ve also got to look at how the economy sucks smart people into finance rather than politics and as I said the reduced power of government generally that stop people entering.

Also the three examples I used were all white straight males. None of them “won” because of positive discrimination but because of frustration with a managerial political class.

For me the most impressive Labour leadership candidate was a BAME woman (Nandy), as was the most impressive deputy candidate IMO (Allen-Khan), both came after white British candidates. Similarly I’d argue Rishi Sunak is one of the more
Impressive Tories (though we are well into shiniest turd territory here) and yet is consistently behind unimpressive white people like Johnson, Raab, or Hancock in terms of positioning.

Equally, Diane Abbott and David Lammy can be terrible yet were elected before any positive discrimination.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Were politics better then? Why the sudden change?

Politicians only try to appeal to what they see voters wanting. You could have had a hybrid of Churchill, Atlee, Thatcher & Blair running for PM and had they not focussed on brexit and immigrants they'd have got hammered because people like Farage, Banks & co would have destroyed them.

Politicians are not suddenly rubbish because they are generally weaker, they are only a product of what the population wants.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Similarly I’d argue Rishi Sunak is one of the more
Impressive Tories (though we are well into shiniest turd territory here) and yet is consistently behind unimpressive white people like Johnson, Raab, or Hancock in terms of positioning.

Whether you agree with his policies or not, Sajid Javid was arguably the most competent leadership candidate for the Tories.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Just looking at voting statistics in the last GE for age group and having read the Guardian article Stu has linked are the Tories decimating their target audience for votes? You were more likely to vote Tory if you were elderly or have parents who are. With the way the government has palmed of the Coronavirus issue off onto care homes wouldn’t that make you think at the next GE of how you were treated during this, or how you will be treated if you go into a care home during the next term, or how your parents were treated in all of this, or how your parents could be treated in the next term if they have to go into a care home?

You'd think so BUT I also think the Tories are aware of the fact we've barely just started their term in office and that gives them plenty of time to move things back onto others issues like Brexit and the economy by the time they need electing again.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

It’s a hypothesis I’ll give you that, but it’s only really been one party used sparingly so not sure it can explain away the drop in quality. You’ve also got to look at how the economy sucks smart people into finance rather than politics and as I said the reduced power of government generally that stop people entering.

Also the three examples I used were all white straight males. None of them “won” because of positive discrimination but because of frustration with a managerial political class.

For me the most impressive Labour leadership candidate was a BAME woman (Nandy), as was the most impressive deputy candidate IMO (Allen-Khan), both came after white British candidates. Similarly I’d argue Rishi Sunak is one of the more
Impressive Tories (though we are well into shiniest turd territory here) and yet is consistently behind unimpressive white people like Johnson, Raab, or Hancock in terms of positioning.

Equally, Diane Abbott and David Lammy can be terrible yet were elected before any positive discrimination.

The point is that in general nobody cares about how 'impressive' anyone is, all they care about is delivering brexit and how snappy their slogans & soundbites are. Personality and media support are now way, way more important than any personal qualities. And that is because in the main the population don't give a toss about the detail of the politics.

 

[Skybluefaz]

Please tell me more. Not my fault I know more than yourself as you don't seem to know about people like Sultana and are happy to argue the point without checking.

I know about Sultana and Owatemi, it was the apparent better non box ticking candidates I was not aware of. You make claim after claim with no real evidence. Can you tell me at what point in history the question was asked of why MPs were mostly white males? This according to you is the point it all nose dived.

 

[Astute]

It’s a hypothesis I’ll give you that, but it’s only really been one party used sparingly so not sure it can explain away the drop in quality. You’ve also got to look at how the economy sucks smart people into finance rather than politics and as I said the reduced power of government generally that stop people entering.

Also the three examples I used were all white straight males. None of them “won” because of positive discrimination but because of frustration with a managerial political class.

For me the most impressive Labour leadership candidate was a BAME woman (Nandy), as was the most impressive deputy candidate IMO (Allen-Khan), both came after white British candidates. Similarly I’d argue Rishi Sunak is one of the more
Impressive Tories (though we are well into shiniest turd territory here) and yet is consistently behind unimpressive white people like Johnson, Raab, or Hancock in terms of positioning.

Equally, Diane Abbott and David Lammy can be terrible yet were elected before any positive discrimination.

You don't have to be intelligent enough to choose between finance and being an MP. You need a different skill set.

These days do some sort of degree in politics and you are 80% on the way to becoming an MP. I prefer an MP to be older. I want them to have life skills. I want them to learn from life and not a text book or from someone else's opinion. That is why I like the idea of Starmer. Went into politics when older. Not in it for the money. He left a well paid profession to become an MP.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Whether you agree with his policies or not, Sajid Javid was arguably the most competent leadership candidate for the Tories.

Apart from being heavily implicated in tax avoidance schemes & contributing to the worst (soon to be second worst) recession of all time

 

[Astute]

I know about Sultana and Owatemi, it was the apparent better non box ticking candidates I was not aware of. You make claim after claim with no real evidence. Can you tell me at what point in history the question was asked of why MPs were mostly white males? This according to you is the point it all nose dived.

How pathetic.

So you knew about the subject but made out you didn't know about the subject so you could have a dig.

OK you win.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

You don't have to be intelligent enough to choose between finance and being an MP. You need a different skill set.

These days do some sort of degree in politics and you are 80% on the way to becoming an MP. I prefer an MP to be older. I want them to have life skills. I want them to learn from life and not a text book or from someone else's opinion. That is why I like the idea of Starmer. Went into politics when older. Not in it for the money. He left a well paid profession to become an MP.

So by that logic you're a big Rees Mogg supporter?

 

[shmmeee]

Politicians only try to appeal to what they see voters wanting. You could have had a hybrid of Churchill, Atlee, Thatcher & Blair running for PM and had they not focussed on brexit and immigrants they'd have got hammered because people like Farage, Banks & co would have destroyed them.

Politicians are not suddenly rubbish because they are generally weaker, they are only a product of what the population wants.

Anti-immigrant sentiment at the last election was it its lowest point for decades though:



As an aside, did you see that research that showed Farage actually made people less anti-immigration because they didn’t want to be associated with him?

 

[Astute]

So by that logic you're a big Rees Mogg supporter?

You are funny.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

Apart from being heavily implicated in tax avoidance schemes & contributing to the worst (soon to be second worst) recession of all time

You know, I'm going to avoid the political just for a moment, apart from in a wider sense.

In terms of career Javid, and Starmer for that matter, have achieved through hard work, determination, and ability - they both rose to high positions in their respective careers through that rather than by having rich or well-known parents.

As MPs, they've both shown themselves capable of constructing an argument intellectually, and trying to push it.

That's surely the basics for a leader? The only one in the Conservative Party leadership contest who came close to that was Jeremy Hunt, who came across surprisingly well and, again, I'm not exactly convinced given his efforts with the NHS he's who I'd want, but intellectually and in terms of making decisions, they've both shown capabilities which just haven't ever been apparent in the other lot of them.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Anti-immigrant sentiment at the last election was it its lowest point for decades though:

View attachment 15011

As an aside, did you see that research that showed Farage actually made people less anti-immigration because they didn’t want to be associated with him?

The point stands- nobody cares about Nandy's personal integrity, nobody gives a toss about the ethics or track records of anyone- the population is so dumbed down that they just want slogans, soundbites and are happy to believe whatever social media tells them. Why would anyone bother to set out detailed policies or make any effort to come across well when nobody gives a shit? Johnson didn't even bother showing up for interviews, refuses to release documents- nobody cares, he still trounced the others.

 

[Skybluefaz]

How pathetic.

So you knew about the subject but made out you didn't know about the subject so you could have a dig.

OK you win.

Thanks for proving my point.
Feel free to quote my original response and qualify the above statement.

 

[shmmeee]

The point stands- nobody cares about Nandy's personal integrity, nobody gives a toss about the ethics or track records of anyone- the population is so dumbed down that they just want slogans, soundbites and are happy to believe whatever social media tells them. Why would anyone bother to set out detailed policies or make any effort to come across well when nobody gives a shit? Johnson didn't even bother showing up for interviews, refuses to release documents- nobody cares, he still trounced the others.

The people haven’t changed. Politics as rhetoric has been around as long as politics: “Education, education, education” “The lady’s not for turning” “If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour”, etc etc etc.

I think what has changed is general trust in politics since the expenses scandal and more importantly a decline in media quality since the Internet. This means you can survive purely on rhetoric rather than just using it on the general public and still needed to get past serious journalists and MPs in parliament.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

You know, I'm going to avoid the political just for a moment, apart from in a wider sense.

In terms of career Javid, and Starmer for that matter, have achieved through hard work, determination, and ability - they both rose to high positions in their respective careers through that rather than by having rich or well-known parents.

As MPs, they've both shown themselves capable of constructing an argument intellectually, and trying to push it.

That's surely the basics for a leader? The only one in the Conservative Party leadership contest who came close to that was Jeremy Hunt, who came across surprisingly well and, again, I'm not exactly convinced given his efforts with the NHS he's who I'd want, but intellectually and in terms of making decisions, they've both shown capabilities which just haven't ever been apparent in the other lot of them.

I agree with the general point but a cursory review of what Javid got up to should, by any standards, exclude him from being the leader of the country or a main political party. Not sure how he would have been able to talk about clamping down on tax avoidance or talk about financial responsibility after what was revealed about him, would be like Boris giving lectures on family values. I'm sure he's a very smart guy, very hard working- but that doesn't wipe his history clean.

But anyway- like I said nobody gives a toss, the population will forgive anyone for anything if he's "our guy", whereas they will howl with rage if someone on the other side does the same thing.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

The people haven’t changed. Politics as rhetoric has been around as long as politics: “Education, education, education” “The lady’s not for turning” “If you want a nigger for a neighbour, vote Labour”, etc etc etc.

I think what has changed is general trust in politics since the expenses scandal and more importantly a decline in media quality since the Internet. This means you can survive purely on rhetoric rather than just using it on the general public and still needed to get past serious journalists and MPs in parliament.

Thats completely wrong- people have changed. In every walk of life, not just politics. The slang term is "dumbed down", its more complex than that but in general terms it is true. The country is a completely different place to what it was even 20 years ago- fuelled a lot by 'the media', but whatever the cause this is a very different place socially & culturally to how it was.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Slagging you off? Get real. You was wrong. You can't stand being wrong. So you lied. It wad all there in black and white. Shall I repost it again? Then you keep coming out with childish remarks.

I find it really hard to believe you are a teacher at times. You are nothing but a Labour version of G.

I wasn’t wrong and explained why plus this idea of me as some kind of Labour loyalist is ridiculous. Take it to PM if you want I’m not having being called a liar.

 

[Grendel]

Sultana not evidence? Do you live in Coventry? I don't but know all about her. No lazy remark there.

As a local MP she’s not too bad and will respond to people. Wasn’t Innes the other option or was that last time?

 

[djr8369]

The problem is politics were much better when it was those who served the best got elected. Once the question was asked on why were most MP's white males it suddenly changed. That meant that if the best candidate was a white male it could go elsewhere. No problem of gender, race, sexual orientation or whatever being chosen as long as it is the best person fir the job. But isn't it strange that the big change in the type of MP we have also coincided with the massive downgrade in quality of MP's we now have.

Is it a case of white males being less likely to get the job or just giving the oppurtunity to anyone? I've defaulted myselft to judging something as positive discrimination but sometimes when you look into it it is actually perfectly fair. I'm not saying that's the case with MP selection as I don't know the stats just making the point that we shouldn't rush to conclusions.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

PM urges 'caution' amid reports on lockdown easing

Interesting. If true you have to ask:

• Why change it at all? it sends out an unclear message;
• Why let the speculation get as it has? It just encourages people to do what they want.

The messaging and communication has been very poor.

 

[Skybluefaz]

PM urges 'caution' amid reports on lockdown easing

Interesting. If true you have to ask:

• Why change it at all? it sends out an unclear message;
• Why let the speculation get as it has? It just encourages people to do what they want.

The messaging and communication has been very poor.

All bases covered, toss a coin, call both sides then claim victory when it lands. James O'Brien described Trump as doing that. Seems Boris is going the same way.

 

[Grendel]

You don't have to be intelligent enough to choose between finance and being an MP. You need a different skill set.

These days do some sort of degree in politics and you are 80% on the way to becoming an MP. I prefer an MP to be older. I want them to have life skills. I want them to learn from life and not a text book or from someone else's opinion. That is why I like the idea of Starmer. Went into politics when older. Not in it for the money. He left a well paid profession to become an MP.

Well I’ve had dealings with both of them and they were a lot more co operative than the people they replaced

 

[djr8369]

PM urges 'caution' amid reports on lockdown easing

Interesting. If true you have to ask:

• Why change it at all? it sends out an unclear message;
• Why let the speculation get as it has? It just encourages people to do what they want.

The messaging and communication has been very poor.

FFS they've been dropping hints all week things will be relaxed. Noticed a change this week in terms of how many people are about and their demeanour.

Talking of mixed messages have you seen the gov tweet about not being tempted out if you fancy chicken wings? It's hilariously tone deaf but yet another example of mixed messaging as fast food joints are allowed to open.

 

[djr8369]

Well I’ve had dealings with both of them and they were a lot more co operative than the people they replaced

That's good to hear.

 

[fernandopartridge]

FFS they've been dropping hints all week things will be relaxed. Noticed a change this week in terms of how many people are about and their demeanour.

Talking of mixed messages have you seen the gov tweet about not being tempted out if you fancy chicken wings? It's hilariously tone deaf but yet another example of mixed messaging as fast food joints are allowed to open.

The lockdown was led by the public's change of behaviour not the other way around, it'll be the same again and the govt will blame the public.

 

[djr8369]

The lockdown was led by the public's change of behaviour not the other way around, it'll be the same again and the govt will blame the public.

You're absolutely right.

 

[wingy]

The lockdown was led by the public's change of behaviour not the other way around, it'll be the same again and the govt will blame the public.

They've continued with praising it when it's been obvious for around ten days things have slipped..

 

[Ian1779]

Sultana has improved a lot. She was still on shouty activist mode at first but she’s toned that down a lot and comments on local issues more. I’ve been more impressed with the other woman who’s name escapes me right now though.

There were a lot of unhappy people, myself included, at exactly how marginal a safe seat had become. Hard to say how much of that was down to the candidate and how much down to general crap campaign organisation nationally and changing demographics though. Mattie Haven the Con candidate is a local councillor and from what I’ve seen works very hard locally so was a good opponent.

Do you mean Nadia Whitmore?