leicsmac

This observation is interesting, I have a couple of thoughts: - I wonder who will be best placed to take advantage of that "anything goes"? - and if this is to be the future, I wonder how good a thing it is to take the eye of the ball when it comes to much bigger, longer term problems?

I would emphatically agree. Sadly however it appears to be rather popular.

From what I can tell Reform fit the evangelical "Prosperity Gospel" type of religion popular Stateside in terms of policy, given similar policy over there appears popular with that branch of Christianity.

Certainly not "lunatic". I just wish they were more fully onboard with the necessary solutions.

It is, but sadly their platform for doing so is...impractical. It's rather frustrating that as a scientist they tick a lot of the social boxes for me but miss a few on scientific future which means I can't roll with them.

How that isn't a booking for diving I don't know.

Truly excellent from Raducanu. Just hope she can keep it up.

As much as I agree with the idea of some kind of PR system, I think this argument is flawed too. Debate on this area in this way only works when there is a single point of truth which one party can convince the other of. But thanks largely to this digital era, the very idea of truth is being subverted and you can't argue a point against someone who genuinely believes a "different" truth exists. Believe me, I wish it wasn't the case because it renders the very idea of debate practically dead in the water, but here we are. Edit: to give an example, some people believe the truth is that the Earth is flat and/or 6000 years old. They believe this in spite of all evidence otherwise, and they will continue to do so. Those are extreme examples, but others exist. How can you argue the point there?

I've come to think that people learn from history just to repeat it either because they feel "it won't go that way this time" or because they want to repeat it to finish what they started or win where they lost before. In any case, purely pragmatically, certain problems won't tolerate insular "x country first" policy and that's abundantly obvious.

Yep, and with the current situation, the states with smaller populations in the middle can dictate policy like Jim Crow to the larger ones which then just have to at best watch them enact it, and at worst actively participate in it. There does need to be a bulwark against "tyranny of the majority", there's more than enough examples of that, but it's difficult to find a balance and imo it really is individual issue-dependent in order to be enacted fairly, which makes it even more complex.

They may have a rep for using far too much coal (which is mostly true), but the Chinese are also taking renewable power very seriously.

I've long since thought there should be a move from FPTP. I still think it now. Maybe not to direct PR, but some of the continental STV systems would absolutely be worth considering. NB. Just for an additional level of complexity, the past few years has shown that perhaps different issues require different systems for decision and policymaking upon them.

Fair enough. I can see why people think it's important, and it is important, but there are other things much more important that should be in the spotlight and becoming single issue lodestone for voters.

Thinking draw, goes to penalties and then the Germans do what they always do.

Pretty much - to say nothing of the fact that such bigger issues directly affect "smaller" ones like tax and immigration anyway. They affect everything. I'm not sure how logical it is given if you're under the age of 45 you're likely to feel those effects in full before the end of your life, and IMO even if self interest were my guiding star I would be thinking of all my life, not just one small part of it. Such thinking can only be ruinous.

More likely they'll simply view however many deaths that result from it as not their problem and craft policy to that effect.

Well, yes. There's a reason the Chinese use "interesting" as a curse rather than a benediction. The right path forward stands on very thin ice, I would think. But I think others believe that for different reasons to the ones I have.

I can see where you're coming from here. The next five years may well be critical in the direction of the next five decades. Or longer. Or not at all - I guess we'll find out. The effect of digital information dissemination on voting is going to be a thesis level topic for every election to come, I think. It's become critical.

Not as huge as the one already killing a lot of people through drought and extreme weather around the world and only just starting to be felt in terms of consequences. You know that as well as I do. Welcome to the digital era, mon ami - for good and bad. I'm reminded of the book Thud! by Terry Pratchett, it covers multiple-way ethnic divides like this really well.

It's not just a moral stance either. It's simply pragmatic. If you like civilisation the way it is, you think of and set policy for the future, not just the present. Again a repeat, but next time Reform will either get 0 seats or enough to set policy. It won't be in between.

Said this earlier, these days it's really easy for a single issue to get magnified into a massive cause celebre. Shame that isn't happening with the really biggest issues, right.

The next five years are going to be interesting. This election (and world events between the last one and this) has shown how drastically change can come in the digital era.

I'll be honest mate, I wouldn't trust most of Asia to be LGBT friendly for the moment, given what I've seen. Perhaps I'm wrong on that score, though. NZ would be another fair option.

Yep, the wonders of "alternative" information sources. I think this might be close to the mark. Hindutva BJP types likely have a social stance closest to Tories and they will of course oppose Muslims politically however they can.

Scandinavia or Canada? Can't think of many other places seeing as there appear to be quite a few nutjobs with homophobia as part of their policies springing up everywhere.