2015 Election season ..........stuff it in here.

[Vicki Vixen]

When interest rates start to rise, those people (politicians, media) who describe the housing market as a "ladder" will realise pretty quickly that they have misled the public on a huge scale.

[davieG]

Strongly agree with that bit. In 1997, as part of my studies, I spent 4 weeks working with the Labour campaign - though I was drifting away from them by then. A phrase I heard a lot was "crucial swing voters in marginal seats", which I took to mean "clueless, blow-in-the-wind fvckwits in the suburbs and small towns". I'm sure that you'd hear similar phrases at Tory HQ.

 

That's unfair to some people, obviously. There are some people who are well-informed but genuinely torn about who to vote for....and the parties do have to motivate their core vote to go and vote. But a large proportion of the parties' campaigns is directed at people who don't have a clue about politics and make no effort to find out (easier than ever now - all you need is internet access, a brain and a little time). If the parties can win such people over with unaffordable goodies, promise good public services AND low tax, or scare them off "the other lot" with lies and smears, they'll do so.....and if they don't, the other lot will.

 

This problem of a lot of people lacking even a basic understanding of politics is getting worse, now that tribal allegiances are fading. It would be controversial and would have to be carefully balanced, but I think some education in democracy and politics should be compulsory throughout secondary school, so that most people understand the system and the basic arguments on all sides by the age of 18.

As has been said before we're fast becoming a nation of headline readers and many of those headlines don't reflect the actually key facts of the article.

 

Would a 'shirker' be able to buy a house if all the money they receive is through benefits?  I would expect it's workers who are on a low income & living in social housing that this applies to.

 

Not that I agree with it, as it will only be available to people already living in social housing who will be able to purchase the house at a vastly reduced price.  I'm on a below average income & I struggle each month to pay the mortgage on my privately owned house.  Where's my discount?

 

I also don't trust the relevant authorities to re-invest in new housing schemes, as was the case many years ago & part of the reason we are in the shit now.

Local councils weren't allowed to invest any income from council owned properties into replacement homes as it went to the 'government' I guess because the Tories have an aversion to anything council owned or run. Having said that Labour didn't reverse it as far as i can remember.

[Alf Bentley]

It's a tough thing to address and I'm not sure how we can do it.

 

Obviously given what I remember of school (and from reading a few others on here who said the same) there is no way I could justified allowing this to happen in secondary school given the overwhelming political position of teachers and the bias that it would bring.

 

I'm getting a bit sick of the 'we need to engage' people lark, when you think about it, why do we need to? We don't need to get people involved in football, we don't need to get them walking or travelling, if they can't be bothered to take an interest in where their tax goes then so be it, I certainly don't want to see politics dumbed down to the levels it seems to be going to just so people like Joey Essex can swan around with Miliband and Farage and give his view on This Week.

 

 

Why we need to engage people is because, if we don't, it drags politics down to the level that we have both described. That affects everyone and affects our democracy, economy etc (unlike personal decisions over football, walking or travel). It also becomes a vicious circle: people are clueless, so parties spout lies and offer low tax and high-quality public services to win elections; then they can't deliver and people don't know who/what to believe , become cynical and lose faith/interest in democratic politics etc.

 

If people started off with an understanding that you can't have low tax AND high-quality public services, that would be a start. Then they could decide what their political preferences were: low tax or high-quality public services or some compromise (mid-range taxes & services) - and could decide which taxes could be higher, which public spending could be cut etc.

 

Maybe the fears of political bias among teachers (of whatever persuasion) could be tackled by getting representatives of different political parties/groups to come into schools and explain their own views, answer questions, generate debate etc. The teacher could explain the democratic system etc, and the different parties could send in a representative to explain their basic political ideas etc?

[Guest Kopfkino]

Natalie Bennett has this great ability to answer the question she wants rather than the actual question. Worse than any politician in that regard which is saying something

[Guest MattP]

Natalie Bennett has this great ability to answer the question she wants rather than the actual question. Worse than any politician in that regard which is saying something

 

It was another cracker though wasn't it? She's useless at answering a question.

 

She genuinely believes that rich people would actually stay here doesn't she to be hit by all sorts of Robin Hood taxes along with her 60% top rate of tax. Bonkers. Half of them now are people who are here because they ran away from the same thing where they came from.

[Footballwipe]

We do need to engage but I'm becoming so disenfranchised by the way we engage, politicians and everything about politics these days.

 

I'll vote on 7 May but I'm in the outgoing Robathan's seat. Costa will take over with a comfortable majority, as always, because South Leics is, like most, a comfortable seat. Just like the USA we come down to a small % of seats to decide the election, because in Scotland, the north and south, you could put a laughing hyena as the candidate for SNP/Labour/Conservative and they'd win. Voting out of habit than education.

 

The way we digest politics doesn't help. Now, the blatant skew of newspapers in the pre-internet age wasn't exactly the bliss we all remember but social media and many websites just aren't debating. On social media, either side are screaming abuse at each other, joining in where it's fashionable to do so. Both the left and the right have such a vile element that debates just boil down to "he's a cvnt" "all tories are idiots" "Miliband will ruin it for everyone." etc etc

 

No-one is ready to debate. There's nothing wrong with having an inherent bias towards someone, but debate it, get your point across in a civil, educated manner, not just shout each other down.

 

Meanwhile politicians are giving everyone great inspiration. Bickering, personal attacks, blaming one government after another. Accusations and denials, and not addressing the fact that people lying in office (Grant Shapps) are still in their position of power (yes yes, I'm sure other candidates at other parties are bad too.

 

There's no debate anwhere. I watched QT for the first time in ages and it was just a verbal joust of "Conservatives have done this." "yeah but Labout did this" "yeah but Lib Dems did this and the SNP will do that." How can people engage when more time is being spent fighting to get the upper hand for ego than anything else. Similar to this is the "Spin Room" after debates where Labour politicians and supporters claim they won, and Conservative politicians and supporters claim they won. Of course you thought your side won, why do we need to know this. It also starts a new stream of abuse from either side.

 

Politics and general elections need to be caught young. If you're not bothered by your late teens you never will be because there's nothing to incentivise. I don't agree with individual partied going into schools, that's a terrible idea. It would be attempted indoctrination, not education. It would need to be someone truly independent, and I genuinely think people are around that could do that. There are also teachers who could do that. My partner, for example, is not politically minded, I would guarantee she wouldn't teach them about the party, policies and answer questions without bias or agenda. Though this is never easy and I'd be minded with the independent route.

 

I did basic citizenship when I was in year 8 (good lord that was 12 years ago now), we looked at how to spell the word government, MPs, HoL, HoC etc etc and there was a video and everything, but that was it. A year of citizenship. Half a year of RE and ha;f a year of Citizenship would do I'd say.

 

tl;dr - I despise the way politics is debated and reported these days and think it has to be taught young

[RobHawk]

We do need to engage but I'm becoming so disenfranchised by the way we engage, politicians and everything about politics these days.

 

I'll vote on 7 May but I'm in the outgoing Robathan's seat. Costa will take over with a comfortable majority, as always, because South Leics is, like most, a comfortable seat. Just like the USA we come down to a small % of seats to decide the election, because in Scotland, the north and south, you could put a laughing hyena as the candidate for SNP/Labour/Conservative and they'd win. Voting out of habit than education.

 

The way we digest politics doesn't help. Now, the blatant skew of newspapers in the pre-internet age wasn't exactly the bliss we all remember but social media and many websites just aren't debating. On social media, either side are screaming abuse at each other, joining in where it's fashionable to do so. Both the left and the right have such a vile element that debates just boil down to "he's a cvnt" "all tories are idiots" "Miliband will ruin it for everyone." etc etc

 

No-one is ready to debate. There's nothing wrong with having an inherent bias towards someone, but debate it, get your point across in a civil, educated manner, not just shout each other down.

 

Meanwhile politicians are giving everyone great inspiration. Bickering, personal attacks, blaming one government after another. Accusations and denials, and not addressing the fact that people lying in office (Grant Shapps) are still in their position of power (yes yes, I'm sure other candidates at other parties are bad too.

 

There's no debate anwhere. I watched QT for the first time in ages and it was just a verbal joust of "Conservatives have done this." "yeah but Labout did this" "yeah but Lib Dems did this and the SNP will do that." How can people engage when more time is being spent fighting to get the upper hand for ego than anything else. Similar to this is the "Spin Room" after debates where Labour politicians and supporters claim they won, and Conservative politicians and supporters claim they won. Of course you thought your side won, why do we need to know this. It also starts a new stream of abuse from either side.

 

Politics and general elections need to be caught young. If you're not bothered by your late teens you never will be because there's nothing to incentivise. I don't agree with individual partied going into schools, that's a terrible idea. It would be attempted indoctrination, not education. It would need to be someone truly independent, and I genuinely think people are around that could do that. There are also teachers who could do that. My partner, for example, is not politically minded, I would guarantee she wouldn't teach them about the party, policies and answer questions without bias or agenda. Though this is never easy and I'd be minded with the independent route.

 

I did basic citizenship when I was in year 8 (good lord that was 12 years ago now), we looked at how to spell the word government, MPs, HoL, HoC etc etc and there was a video and everything, but that was it. A year of citizenship. Half a year of RE and ha;f a year of Citizenship would do I'd say.

 

tl;dr - I despise the way politics is debated and reported these days and think it has to be taught young

I agree with you regarding political debate.

 

The TV debates are the worst example of this. I saw better, more thought provoking debate in this thread regarding how parties would achieve what they say compared to what the actual politicians had to say. Its not a debate its a shouting match about who did what. Its like those who say Milliband looks to awkward etc, its not a beauty contest, don't worry about how he sounds, worry about what he says!  

 

Politics really is down the shitter, and this election has proven it!

[Guest MattP]

Whatever your political leaning you have to agree that Elizabeth Truss is ****ing appalling. She's shockingly bad at debating on QT.

 

Just reminded me of this post as she's just been on the Daily Politics and was horrific again, only in this position as Cameron was being forced to promote women as his cabinet was so shocking being white and male.

 

This situation is only going to get worse as well, parties on all sides are desperate to throw as many black, asian, gay or whatever minority they can forward immediately to show the public how not racist/homopphic/sexist they are even if that person is completely incapable of doing the job.

 

Expect to see some right idiots after this election up speaking who miles out of their depth promoted purely on the basis of gender or race.

[Guest Bilo]

There's no doubt in my mind that Citizenship or even straight Politics needs to be a Humanities GCSE as well as taught at KS3. If RE is on the syllabus, rightly so as religious issues are important to millions across the country, that surely young people ought to be learning about politics.

 

The political ignorance you hear from people is utterly astounding at times; from the typical stuff that all politicians are corrupt to not knowing the most basic stuff such as what is an MP. I'm not even joking either. This is a serious point, gullible and ignorant people are easily manipulated by people who offer them easy solutions, an identifiable scapegoat and who 'dumbs it down' to just the right level to achieve a groundswell of support. 

 

Young people ought to be politically literate, they should be able to infer meaning from politician's speech as well as they can infer meaning from a novel. Once you build that ability, you build engagement with politics. We're already seeing a downturn in voter turnout - it worries me that low voter turnout often leads to the lunatic fringe getting a foothold, as does sheer ignorance about politics. 

 

In my constituency; we have a 22 year old, who counts his real world experience as working as an usher in a theatre, surging in the polls because he stands for UKIP. If you were to ask the average voter why they're voting for him, I more or less guarantee the extent of their answer would centre around immigrants. They haven't the first clue what UKIP policy is surrounding the economy, the NHS, education and they couldn't care less. Indeed, a friend of mine was told by a UKIP supporter recently that 'they don't care about the NHS, as long as they do something about the immigrants.' We need a situation where people demand more than that from their politicians. 

 

It's not unusual either. Christ, look at the battle for the seat in Bradford West. That's a situation where you don't so much cringe at what's being said by a snake oil salesman politician and his supporters but shudder in fear. The latent sectarianism is terrifying, and that's what ignorance of the political world has the capacity to do. A clever wordsmith playing on the fears and prejudices of a population, disengagement and disinterest from a significant portion of the population and there you have it; a bona fide nutjob in Parliament representing people. 

 

Call me paranoid, but it's a slippery slope.

[sphericalfox]

There's no doubt in my mind that Citizenship or even straight Politics needs to be a Humanities GCSE as well as taught at KS3. If RE is on the syllabus, rightly so as religious issues are important to millions across the country, that surely young people ought to be learning about politics.

 

The political ignorance you hear from people is utterly astounding at times; from the typical stuff that all politicians are corrupt to not knowing the most basic stuff such as what is an MP. I'm not even joking either. This is a serious point, gullible and ignorant people are easily manipulated by people who offer them easy solutions, an identifiable scapegoat and who 'dumbs it down' to just the right level to achieve a groundswell of support. 

 

Young people ought to be politically literate, they should be able to infer meaning from politician's speech as well as they can infer meaning from a novel. Once you build that ability, you build engagement with politics. We're already seeing a downturn in voter turnout - it worries me that low voter turnout often leads to the lunatic fringe getting a foothold, as does sheer ignorance about politics. 

 

In my constituency; we have a 22 year old, who counts his real world experience as working as an usher in a theatre, surging in the polls because he stands for UKIP. If you were to ask the average voter why they're voting for him, I more or less guarantee the extent of their answer would centre around immigrants. They haven't the first clue what UKIP policy is surrounding the economy, the NHS, education and they couldn't care less. Indeed, a friend of mine was told by a UKIP supporter recently that 'they don't care about the NHS, as long as they do something about the immigrants.' We need a situation where people demand more than that from their politicians. 

 

It's not unusual either. Christ, look at the battle for the seat in Bradford West. That's a situation where you don't so much cringe at what's being said by a snake oil salesman politician and his supporters but shudder in fear. The latent sectarianism is terrifying, and that's what ignorance of the political world has the capacity to do. A clever wordsmith playing on the fears and prejudices of a population, disengagement and disinterest from a significant portion of the population and there you have it; a bona fide nutjob in Parliament representing people. 

 

Call me paranoid, but it's a slippery slope.

 

Is there any benefit for an education minister to try improve the level of political understanding and knowledge in schools? The cynic in me says an ignorant mass of gullible sheep generation after generation is precisely what they want. Even if a stink was made of it, the bare minimum would be applied due to 'lack of resources'. It's not as though there's an insatiable appetite for it, the level of shallowness within every walk of society isn't going anywhere soon.

[Guest Bilo]

Is there any benefit for an education minister to try improve the level of political understanding and knowledge in schools? The cynic in me says an ignorant mass of gullible sheep generation after generation is precisely what they want. Even if a stink was made of it, the bare minimum would be applied due to 'lack of resources'. It's not as though there's an insatiable appetite for it, the level of shallowness within every walk of society isn't going anywhere soon.

 

The problem is the lack of interest in politics. We've gone from 80% turnouts to just about scraping 60% in a generation, some elections such as European elections, local council and Police Commissioner elections do well to scrape 25%. 

 

Also, I don't see why it wouldn't be in politicians' interest to improve understanding. Yes, they'll have to work harder for votes but it does at least that voters would be less fickle and susceptible to the 'next big thing' coming along or a dodgy salesman trotting out simple answers.

[city187]

Who actually thinks there vote matters at all really. Your fooling yourself if you think you make a difference. Its ok if you wana pick labour or cons but if you dont like me then wheres the point. Choosing between cam or miliband is like deciding weather you want to eat sh*t or drink piss so id rather do neither. Politicians are as far away from the real world then ever before.

[Strokes]

Who actually thinks there vote matters at all really. Your fooling yourself if you think you make a difference. Its ok if you wana pick labour or cons but if you dont like me then wheres the point. Choosing between cam or miliband is like deciding weather you want to eat sh*t or drink piss so id rather do neither. Politicians are as far away from the real world then ever before.

Yeah nobodies vote matters, if no one voted the result would be the same. Rip up your ballot paper and burn your bra baby.

[Voll Blau]

Who actually thinks there vote matters at all really. Your fooling yourself if you think you make a difference. Its ok if you wana pick labour or cons but if you dont like me then wheres the point. Choosing between cam or miliband is like deciding weather you want to eat sh*t or drink piss so id rather do neither. Politicians are as far away from the real world then ever before.

 

So spoil your vote. Tell them they're a bunch of cvnts. If you can't be bothered to make a point they'll continue doing as they please becaue they'll assume you don't care.

[Guest Bilo]

Not turning up to vote is apathy, not protest.

 

VB's spot on. If anything, we need a 'None of the Above' option. 

[city187]

So spoil your vote. Tell them they're a bunch of cvnts. If you can't be bothered to make a point they'll continue doing as they please becaue they'll assume you don't care.

Not voting is making a point. Its a boycott off the election system. Like when fans miss a game in protest. If we had the lowest ever voting turnout in history it will be a good thing as shows most people are sick of the same old crap and would of embarrassed Westminster to the rest of world. Its forever really only been labour or cons and nothing over all changes. So **** the vote and if your so blinded by it all that you think your vote changes things then good luck to you. Give a chicken free roam they think there free but there still going to end up on your plate at some point like the rest of them.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Who actually thinks there vote matters at all really. Your fooling yourself if you think you make a difference. Its ok if you wana pick labour or cons but if you dont like me then wheres the point. Choosing between cam or miliband is like deciding weather you want to eat sh*t or drink piss so id rather do neither. Politicians are as far away from the real world then ever before.

If people like you don't vote, then don't moan about politics, or governments.

[Strokes]

Not voting is making a point. Its a boycott off the election system. Like when fans miss a game in protest. If we had the lowest ever voting turnout in history it will be a good thing as shows most people are sick of the same old crap and would of embarrassed Westminster to the rest of world. Its forever really only been labour or cons and nothing over all changes. So **** the vote and if your so blinded by it all that you think your vote changes things then good luck to you. Give a chicken free roam they think there free but there still going to end up on your plate at some point like the rest of them.

You won't change anything sat at home in your pants.

[Guest Bilo]

Not voting is making a point. Its a boycott off the election system. Like when fans miss a game in protest. If we had the lowest ever voting turnout in history it will be a good thing as shows most people are sick of the same old crap and would of embarrassed Westminster to the rest of world. Its forever really only been labour or cons and nothing over all changes. So **** the vote and if your so blinded by it all that you think your vote changes things then good luck to you. Give a chicken free roam they think there free but there still going to end up on your plate at some point like the rest of them.

 

It isn't.

 

Your lack of vote means nothing, spoiling the ballot paper is a statement. If you don't turn up, you're shoe-horned into the same category as those who couldn't be arsed to leave the telly. If however you turn up and spoil your ballot paper, you've shown that you've made the effort to leave your house and do so. 

[Strokes]

It isn't.

 

Your lack of vote means nothing, spoiling the ballot paper is a statement. If you don't turn up, you're shoe-horned into the same category as those who couldn't be arsed to leave the telly. If however you turn up and spoil your ballot paper, you've shown that you've made the effort to leave your house and do so.

The reality is, he can't be arsed. So would rather rubbish democracy, somehow feel superior and hope we don't notice. I would rather vote labour than boycott an election......maybe not.

[Webbo]

The reality is, he can't be arsed. So would rather rubbish democracy, somehow feel superior and hope we don't notice. I would rather vote labour than boycott an election......maybe not.

Steady on.

[Guest]

Not turning up to vote is apathy, not protest.

 

VB's spot on. If anything, we need a 'None of the Above' option. 

 

Indeed. Perhaps a majority of the population voting to state that the current crop of politicians and parties don't represent what they want for their country would send a louder message for change than the current system.

 

Perhaps I'm a tiny bit idealistic though

[city187]

You won't change anything sat at home in your pants.

Yes thats the real reason. Im a habitual masturbater and just cant leave the house to vote.

I have voted in past and wont make that mistake again. You go enjoy watching cam, miliband and the clang tour our country waving and smiling and kissing babies telling you how they can change everything for the best. And no i dont think im superior people just veiw things differently. Didnt mean to sound patronising but im sure a financial backer to a party will have far more say on policys and stuff when there puppet gets power then most voters put together.

[city187]

Lets just make it easy and become communists

[MooseBreath]

Yes thats the real reason. Im a habitual masturbater and just cant leave the house to vote.

I have voted in past and wont make that mistake again. You go enjoy watching cam, miliband and the clang tour our country waving and smiling and kissing babies telling you how they can change everything for the best. And no i dont think im superior people just veiw things differently. Didnt mean to sound patronising but im sure a financial backer to a party will have far more say on policys and stuff when there puppet gets power then most voters put together.

Can you give any examples of policies you'd like to see but which aren't being offered by any of the parties?