• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

Gazza said:
Nigel actually is one hell of a speaker whether you agree with his views or not. He doesn’t really need to dial into facts as his articulation of tapping into people’s emotions gets him ears. He’s on the pulse and knows exactly what he is saying to suit his agenda.

If he gets into power he will soon realise his policies will fall flat and his plan of action will not succeed the way he’s peddling. This doesn’t make him any more special or worse than the people that have recently come before him.
Click to expand...
I think some of his policies may never be enacted if he gets in, but it won't matter as long as he makes strides in dealing with immigration. And actually it may suit him to be head of a minority government where Parliament and the courts try and block him at every turn. Boris did that when he first came in as head of a minority government - made a big show of battling Parliament and the courts in attempting to get his brexit legislation through before dissolving parkiament and calling a GE.

If Farage struggles as head of a minority government to enact his programme its probably perfect for him in completing the destruction of the existing political structures in this country by making a public show of how broken they are (which is his narrative)
 
Grays_1890 said:
Those that defend his lack of depth, despite being a smart speaker clearly have. Those happy to pass of lac of depth as "quips" for example
Click to expand...
He wouldn’t be any different from starmer suggesting anyone who wanted grooming gangs investigated was far right, or anyone who went to the London march was a racist.
 
Gazza said:
He wouldn’t be any different from starmer suggesting anyone who wanted grooming gangs investigated was far right, or anyone who went to the London march was a racist.
Click to expand...

I hate Starmer, so I would agree

They are equally people with total lack of substance, one just speaks better than the other.
 
Grays_1890 said:
I hate Starmer, so I would agree

They are equally people with total lack of substance, one just speaks better than the other.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t really matter whatever your views of starmer or farage, making these sweeping statements in public make no sense at all but to serve their own agenda.

We just don’t have any one in politics with charisma , conviction and truth.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Those that defend his lack of depth, despite being a smart speaker clearly have. Those happy to pass of lac of depth as "quips" for example
Click to expand...
People are not interested in depth though. You can't lambast Farage for not rambling on about detail then say my posts on this forum are too long to read (which many of you do). People want to vote for people that clearly articulate the direction of travel. People are not interested in understanding the detail as they feel that detail is for civil servants, government lawyers and experts to resolve. Farage therefore only needs to make it clear to people that his number one priority is to stop and even reverse net migration and illegal migration and give them a reaaonable confidence he'll find a way to make that happen or have a better chance of moving in that direction than anyone else.

Therefore lack of depth is not a weakness in politics coherence and strength of messaging is what is key.
 
Gazza said:
Doesn’t really matter whatever your views of starmer or farage, making these sweeping statements in public make no sense at all but to serve their own agenda.

We just don’t have any one in politics with charisma , conviction and truth.
Click to expand...
Farage ticks all 3 on the issue of immigration. I think he is weaker on other bits but that doesn't matter as where he is strong on all 3 points is where the current political debate and focus is.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
People are not interested in depth though. You can't lambast Farage for not rambling on about detail then say my posts on this forum are too long to read (which many of you do). People want to vote for people that clearly articulate the direction of travel. People are not interested in understanding the detail as they feel that detail is for civil servants, government lawyers and experts to resolve. Farage therefore only needs to make it clear to people that his number one priority is to stop and even reverse net migration and illegal migration and give them a reaaonable confidence he'll find a way to make that happen or have a better chance of moving in that direction than anyone else.

Therefore lack of depth is not a weakness in politics coherence and strength of messaging is what is key.
Click to expand...
Being in control of short sharp facts is depth.

Saying "statistics show 40% of Muslim ountry want Sharia Law" Would be short and be backed up by some stats" saying two taxis drivers isn't a quip, it just makes him sound like a div, but it plays up to the crowd that like that level of rhetoric.

Writing long drawn out posts to make a point you could have in far less is just boring fella.

Having worked in ops for events and managed 1000s of people you frankly wouldn't be allowed in any meeting past the first if you couldn't say more with less.

There is a stark difference
 
Grays_1890 said:
Being in control of short sharp facts is depth.

Writing long drawn out posts to make a point you could have in far less is just boring fella.

Having worked in ops for events and managed 1000s of people you frankly wouldn't be allowed in any meeting past the first if you couldn't say more with less.

There is a stark difference
Click to expand...
precisely the point being made. You want short sharp facts. Farage is brilliant at this. 2 million in last 2 years and you wonder why you can't get a job, a house, why food is going up. Its short. Its sharp. Its a fact. You don't need the detail.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
precisely the point being made. You want short sharp facts. Farage is brilliant at this. 2 million in last 2 years and you wonder why you can't get a job, a house, why food is going up. Its short. Its sharp. Its a fact. You don't need the detail.
Click to expand...
Nope, the point being made he gave a statement about a taxi driver endorsing his view rather than providing a genuine stat, which would have taken the same length of time as his actual answer.

You decided that not being able to give depth in one sentence is comparable to your ramblings on here.
 
Grays_1890 said:
Nope, the point being made he gave a statement about a taxi driver endorsing his view rather than providing a genuine stat, which would have taken the same length of time as his actual answer.

You decided that not being able to give depth in one sentence is comparable to your ramblings on here.
Click to expand...
Nope. He combines anecdotes of thought processes of everyday people with facts and stats and its powerful.
 
Grays_1890 said:
He was asked his evidence on a statement and he mentioned 2 taxi drivers. Whatever you might fanboy over re: his overall persona, it was an idiotic response.
Click to expand...
It’s silly to ask for evidence what is supposed to do? Bring out a recording or call the cabbie and ask him to repeat his words? He could have easily said on my way to work a taxi driver said such and such and it’s concerning that x amount of Muslims in the uk want to bring sharia law here. Even then bringing the taxi driver into the equation is a little silly to make his point.

My message to anyone wanting to change the laws of the land to pander to their religious beliefs can find paradise in Afghanistan, Saudi, etc there is plenty of land for all to live by the means they think is right. I wouldn’t go to a country dictated by sharia and demand civil liberties and equality.
 
Grays_1890 said:
I agree 100%

But I also believe there should be consequence of lies.

When people say "don't take him literally but take him seriously" then IMO the truth is being backed and bullied into a corner.

I think people need to engage more, so will repeat that, but lies need calling out for what it is.

The issue has heightened since covid and Twitter age IMO, people have lost any sense of balance and ability to be a decent human being. Some have put their chips all in on Trump and Farage and willing to ignore the crude because they agree with a few key points.

It's sad is what it is
Click to expand...
There is an answer, it's at the polling station.

This seems to be a common theme since Trump was elected the first time. People are constantly looking for a non-electoral method to remove those they didn't want in power.

There are lots of good reasons to enjoy living in a democracy. One of the downsides is that the electorate are mainly pretty fudging stupid (see electing a Labour govt to fix the economy for a recent example). We just have to live with their mistakes for a few years, squirrel our money away where they can't get to it and wait for them to learn their own lessons.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
I think some of his policies may never be enacted if he gets in, but it won't matter as long as he makes strides in dealing with immigration. And actually it may suit him to be head of a minority government where Parliament and the courts try and block him at every turn. Boris did that when he first came in as head of a minority government - made a big show of battling Parliament and the courts in attempting to get his brexit legislation through before dissolving parkiament and calling a GE.

If Farage struggles as head of a minority government to enact his programme its probably perfect for him in completing the destruction of the existing political structures in this country by making a public show of how broken they are (which is his narrative)
Click to expand...
I'm not sure he's all that far from a majority anyway.

Once Reform show that they are the only viable protest vote then the Lib Dems no longer have a policy and you'll see a lot of votes go to Reform from there.
 
scaramanga said:
I'm not sure he's all that far from a majority anyway.

Once Reform show that they are the only viable protest vote then the Lib Dems no longer have a policy and you'll see a lot of votes go to Reform from there.
Click to expand...
Yeah the Lib Dems are an interesting one. They used to be quite a liberal party that was a favourite of students and politically active young people. A "progressive" party some might say. They lost that vote when they went into coalition and rowed back on their promises on tuition fees.

They then decided to rebuild a base by targeting conservative voters in the south east that were feeling disenfranchised over Brexit.

They were very successful at doing this but now what they've suddenly found is that not only has this policy of targeting conservative seats run out of road (there are only a handful of seats where they are the second largest party to the tories) but they have ended up with a fairly right wing "conservative" base whose only real point of agreement with the Lib Dem leadership and traditional base is on the UK's relationship with Europe.

But these Lib Dem voters could be tempted by Reform on issues such as the economy (these "thatcherite" voters are instinctively low tax) and immigration. So again the LDs have been forced rightward into a game against Reform they cannot win.
 
Silly McSilly Face said:
Yeah the Lib Dems are an interesting one. They used to be quite a liberal party that was a favourite of students and politically active young people. A "progressive" party some might say. They lost that vote when they went into coalition and rowed back on their promises on tuition fees.

They then decided to rebuild a base by targeting conservative voters in the south east that were feeling disenfranchised over Brexit.

They were very successful at doing this but now what they've suddenly found is that not only has this policy of targeting conservative seats run out of road (there are only a handful of seats where they are the second largest party to the tories) but they have ended up with a fairly right wing "conservative" base whose only real point of agreement with the Lib Dem leadership and traditional base is on the UK's relationship with Europe.

But these Lib Dem voters could be tempted by Reform on issues such as the economy (these "thatcherite" voters are instinctively low tax) and immigration. So again the LDs have been forced rightward into a game against Reform they cannot win.
Click to expand...
Reform are the only party endorsing a low tax, low spend form of government. I'd expect them to win the vote of everyone with at least a vague understanding of economics.
 
Grays_1890 said:
He was asked his evidence on a statement and he mentioned 2 taxi drivers. Whatever you might fanboy over re: his overall persona, it was an idiotic response.
Click to expand...
The message i replied to of yours was clearly meant to be a broader observation. I.e. you said "those that defend his lack of depth". He brings as much detail as necessary and he doesn't engage with a question directly if he is not sure of the facts. He is very rarely made to look like a fool as a result and if he does deflect it will normally be with a quip or story that advances his narrative or connection to his base. Pointing out what a good politician he is isnt being a fan boy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back