| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters 16:07 - May 2 with 5944 views | positivity |
how would you deal with them?
how do you tackle someone who appeals to people’s base instincts and has no intention of keeping a single promise - just getting to power and blaming the problems on everyone else?
any ideas? |  |
| |  |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 16:54 - May 3 with 1009 views | JackNorthStand |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 15:37 - May 3 by Cheltenham_Blue |
What about anyone else? |
Politics isn’t a one size fits all, what will suit some, won’t suit others and that’s essentially why we decide to vote whichever way we do. And in that regard, I can’t speak on behalf of others I have just answered the question honestly to give some insight as to why this policy matters to me. | | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 16:55 - May 3 with 1014 views | Radlett_blue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 15:19 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
New exploration licenses will be issued in the North Sea. For context, I work in the oil and gas industry, so it would be a huge boost to North Sea oil and those within the industry. |
Yes, we import a huge amount of gas (and some oil) from Norway, effectively from the North Sea fields that we share with them, at considerably greater expense than exploiting our own fields. This clearly makes NO contribution to the environment & is financially bad for the country. |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 16:56 - May 3 with 1010 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 16:54 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
Politics isn’t a one size fits all, what will suit some, won’t suit others and that’s essentially why we decide to vote whichever way we do. And in that regard, I can’t speak on behalf of others I have just answered the question honestly to give some insight as to why this policy matters to me. |
Is it possible for you to look at the bigger picture? Do you think reduces CO2 emissions is a good thing? Do you think it is possible for people in your industry to put your transferable skills to good use elsewhere? |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 17:08 - May 3 with 993 views | JackNorthStand |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 15:33 - May 3 by Nthsuffolkblue |
So you think there are sufficient reserves of gas waiting to be found that we could reduce our debt by extracting it?
You don't think there is any future in biogas and other alternative fuels instead?
You don't think it much more likely that the middle east, US, Russia and even Greenland will plug the gap instead? |
I’m speaking from someone who works in an industry that will benefit from drilling and exploration licenses being issued once again, in the UK. I’m interested to know your thoughts, feel free to share would be great to hear. | | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 17:32 - May 3 with 965 views | Libero |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 15:19 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
New exploration licenses will be issued in the North Sea. For context, I work in the oil and gas industry, so it would be a huge boost to North Sea oil and those within the industry. |
I'll think of you and your booming industry while my son and others I love are subject to Reform's archaic takes on disability. Enjoy the blood money. [Post edited 3 May 17:32]
|  | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 17:55 - May 3 with 927 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 17:08 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
I’m speaking from someone who works in an industry that will benefit from drilling and exploration licenses being issued once again, in the UK. I’m interested to know your thoughts, feel free to share would be great to hear. |
I think it is important that we reduce CO2 emissions to protect the environment. I think you and your colleagues will have many transferable skills that should be very important in the renewables sectors. I think there is mileage in harnessing biogas from livestock that will have the double bonus of both reducing CO2 and methane emissions.
Would you like to answer the question of whether you can see the bigger picture and whether you agree with the above paragraph? | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 19:27 - May 3 with 890 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 16:54 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
Politics isn’t a one size fits all, what will suit some, won’t suit others and that’s essentially why we decide to vote whichever way we do. And in that regard, I can’t speak on behalf of others I have just answered the question honestly to give some insight as to why this policy matters to me. |
"Politics isn’t a one size fits all", just North Sea oil and gas workers then.
What other policy gems do you have? |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 20:03 - May 3 with 855 views | tractordownsouth |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 15:14 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
Scrap net zero and related subsidies |
This is the policy area where the Reform stance is massively out of step with their voter base.
Look at this from Richard Tice. Among their target seats in 2029 will be the de-industrialised areas of the North and Midlands that backed Brexit. If they go into that election actively opposing investment in constituencies that are badly in need of secure, well-paid jobs, that will be music to the Labour Party's ears.
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 20:44 - May 3 with 827 views | Coastalblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 20:03 - May 3 by tractordownsouth |
This is the policy area where the Reform stance is massively out of step with their voter base.
Look at this from Richard Tice. Among their target seats in 2029 will be the de-industrialised areas of the North and Midlands that backed Brexit. If they go into that election actively opposing investment in constituencies that are badly in need of secure, well-paid jobs, that will be music to the Labour Party's ears.
|
Can somebody explain to somebody who's as thick as two short planks the logic behind that statement or why it was made?
I'm not understanding. |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 04:14 - May 4 with 752 views | JackNorthStand |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 17:55 - May 3 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I think it is important that we reduce CO2 emissions to protect the environment. I think you and your colleagues will have many transferable skills that should be very important in the renewables sectors. I think there is mileage in harnessing biogas from livestock that will have the double bonus of both reducing CO2 and methane emissions.
Would you like to answer the question of whether you can see the bigger picture and whether you agree with the above paragraph? |
That’s a good point you’ve raised regarding transferable skills to the renewable sector. And actually I agree with you, I believe this is something that should be considered by the government, essentially some sort of scheme for skilled workers who wish to transition or who have been laid off due to the above issues you and I discussed.
Transition can happen, but the transition period required is long term and believe suspending the issuing of new drilling licenses is shooting from the hip.
You seem like you have a lot of knowledge on renewables . Any thoughts on GeoThermal energy? | | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 04:19 - May 4 with 750 views | JackNorthStand |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 19:27 - May 3 by Cheltenham_Blue |
"Politics isn’t a one size fits all", just North Sea oil and gas workers then.
What other policy gems do you have? |
A policy that would appeal to me may not necessarily appeal to you and that’s essentially why there are different parties in an election. It’s ok to disagree. If there was a general election held tomorrow, I would be voting for reform. | | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 04:55 - May 4 with 739 views | Benters |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 08:11 - May 3 by BanksterDebtSlave |
You put your full stop in the wrong place Benters. |
Did I? I do apologise. |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 10:57 - May 4 with 645 views | StokieBlue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 20:03 - May 3 by tractordownsouth |
This is the policy area where the Reform stance is massively out of step with their voter base.
Look at this from Richard Tice. Among their target seats in 2029 will be the de-industrialised areas of the North and Midlands that backed Brexit. If they go into that election actively opposing investment in constituencies that are badly in need of secure, well-paid jobs, that will be music to the Labour Party's ears.
|
What a moronic stance.
SB |  | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:11 - May 4 with 620 views | chicoazul |
Reform are winning because both Labour and the Tories have lost the ability to understand or communicate with the working class in Britain.
I find Opies OP flawed because you can criticise who you want. |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:14 - May 4 with 608 views | redrickstuhaart |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:11 - May 4 by chicoazul |
Reform are winning because both Labour and the Tories have lost the ability to understand or communicate with the working class in Britain.
I find Opies OP flawed because you can criticise who you want. |
I think its more because social media echo chambers and divisive culture wars (encouraged by the last government) have created an environment where easy answers are offered which appeal to base instincts, and are not easily debunked because of those echo chambers and warped media.
How you break through that is very hard to say. I fear that we just have to hope that enough of us are sane, care about truth and evidence, and keep pointing out the misinformation sufficiently to keep the numbers below a mandate. | | | |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:35 - May 4 with 581 views | Radlett_blue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:11 - May 4 by chicoazul |
Reform are winning because both Labour and the Tories have lost the ability to understand or communicate with the working class in Britain.
I find Opies OP flawed because you can criticise who you want. |
I think the same thing is happening across the developed West - bad demographics making entitlements near unaffordable plus globalisation & technology destroying the traditional working class jobs. Hence the lives of many people have become worse, with little prospect of major improvement. The mainstream politicians bleat, but aren't willing to take unpopular decisions & hence the siren calls from the likes of Trump, Farage & a host of European right wing parties sound very appealing, although they don't really have any better solutions, but strike a chord by (wrongly) blaming immigrants & immigration. A bit like the 1930s. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:37 - May 4 with 576 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 10:57 - May 4 by StokieBlue |
What a moronic stance.
SB |
He doesn't seem to understand how the Parliamentary process, majority government or how his own role in it actually works. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:58 - May 4 with 530 views | chicoazul |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 11:14 - May 4 by redrickstuhaart |
I think its more because social media echo chambers and divisive culture wars (encouraged by the last government) have created an environment where easy answers are offered which appeal to base instincts, and are not easily debunked because of those echo chambers and warped media.
How you break through that is very hard to say. I fear that we just have to hope that enough of us are sane, care about truth and evidence, and keep pointing out the misinformation sufficiently to keep the numbers below a mandate. |
This is just Everyone else is stupid all over again. This is precisely what I’m talking about. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:01 - May 4 with 527 views | pointofblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 19:24 - May 2 by wrightsrightglove |
This is very much the crux of the issue, to me, it has to be a two pronged approach:
1. You have to highlight every false promise they make when it’s not delivered. Make it clear to the people who voted for them that they’re failing to deliver for them.
2. You have to show them that there’s a positive alternative. I had hoped that labour would come in and become a strong, progressive left leaning government but instead they’ve come in and enacted what are essentially Tory policies. Show these people a different path where their lives are directly improved and they’ll vote for you |
Point two is it. The same issue was raised as part of the Adolescence discourse - that young men are busy being told about how they're everything that's wrong in the world and how their behaviour needs to change, rather than acknowledging the issues which are present, and have led them down the path to extremism.
To defeat Reform there has to be a positive voice promoting policies which will have an impact on people's lives. Promising change which will open the country up to investment and growth, improving the collective lot. Allowing people to feel involved, and that they're being supported by the government.
Derek Hatton, who was hardly a fan of Thatcher, made this point about her government - people felt they were moving up in the world, particularly post Falklands. They could buy their houses, they could invest in shares, they were capitalists. The country had a clear vision. Whilst it was... let's say controversial... it worked.
The process of selling Thatcherism, and being able to see it in action, is what is required now. Not the actual policies, but the way it invigorated so many people, who felt their lives were up. Blairism followed the same path. People did indeed feel things could and subsequently did get better.
Labour are now the ones with the hands on the tiller, and can change trajectory. But it's not easy to do it right. Thatcherism and Blairism are both examples of smoke and mirrors, where the surface, relative, success hid the murkiness of problems stirring underneath. But abandoning disability cuts, not turning away from the complexity of the transgender discussion and perhaps reversing the decision on WFA (albeit I understand why they feel WFA should be means tested so that could be more down to the messaging and where the cut is made).
I think they also need to consider discussing with France whether they can buy land in Calais (the historical irony) to build an immigration centre where people can claim asylum and perhaps even stay, without making the treacherous journey across the channel.
To stop Reform, parties need to stop trying to be Reform. There's a while political spectrum outside of it to open up and embrace it they have the will and the nerve. And they need to. Because in an election battle between Reform and Reform Lite, there is only one winner. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:08 - May 4 with 512 views | Plums |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:01 - May 4 by pointofblue |
Point two is it. The same issue was raised as part of the Adolescence discourse - that young men are busy being told about how they're everything that's wrong in the world and how their behaviour needs to change, rather than acknowledging the issues which are present, and have led them down the path to extremism.
To defeat Reform there has to be a positive voice promoting policies which will have an impact on people's lives. Promising change which will open the country up to investment and growth, improving the collective lot. Allowing people to feel involved, and that they're being supported by the government.
Derek Hatton, who was hardly a fan of Thatcher, made this point about her government - people felt they were moving up in the world, particularly post Falklands. They could buy their houses, they could invest in shares, they were capitalists. The country had a clear vision. Whilst it was... let's say controversial... it worked.
The process of selling Thatcherism, and being able to see it in action, is what is required now. Not the actual policies, but the way it invigorated so many people, who felt their lives were up. Blairism followed the same path. People did indeed feel things could and subsequently did get better.
Labour are now the ones with the hands on the tiller, and can change trajectory. But it's not easy to do it right. Thatcherism and Blairism are both examples of smoke and mirrors, where the surface, relative, success hid the murkiness of problems stirring underneath. But abandoning disability cuts, not turning away from the complexity of the transgender discussion and perhaps reversing the decision on WFA (albeit I understand why they feel WFA should be means tested so that could be more down to the messaging and where the cut is made).
I think they also need to consider discussing with France whether they can buy land in Calais (the historical irony) to build an immigration centre where people can claim asylum and perhaps even stay, without making the treacherous journey across the channel.
To stop Reform, parties need to stop trying to be Reform. There's a while political spectrum outside of it to open up and embrace it they have the will and the nerve. And they need to. Because in an election battle between Reform and Reform Lite, there is only one winner. |
I agree with all you have written. One major difference between Thatcher, Blair and the parties that are not part of the alt-right, neo-fascist movement is those two PM's in waiting had the press on side and they to a large degree called the shots.
The press and social media companies are now largely offshore, tax avoiding cheerleaders for all that's going on. It's a very big hill to take them on but it must be done. |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:12 - May 4 with 493 views | pointofblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:08 - May 4 by Plums |
I agree with all you have written. One major difference between Thatcher, Blair and the parties that are not part of the alt-right, neo-fascist movement is those two PM's in waiting had the press on side and they to a large degree called the shots.
The press and social media companies are now largely offshore, tax avoiding cheerleaders for all that's going on. It's a very big hill to take them on but it must be done. |
That is true, which makes it more difficult to sell an image than the days of Thatcher and Blair. If I was Labour, though, I think I would open myself up to them. Offer to write articles, carry out exclusive interviews with the likes of The Sun, The Mail and The Telegraph. In all likelihood, they wouldn't say no to the opportunity. Then the voice is on their page, even if the opinion column is denouncing what is said. Both opinions, at the very least, would be there, rather than being an echo chamber. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:16 - May 4 with 472 views | Plums |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:12 - May 4 by pointofblue |
That is true, which makes it more difficult to sell an image than the days of Thatcher and Blair. If I was Labour, though, I think I would open myself up to them. Offer to write articles, carry out exclusive interviews with the likes of The Sun, The Mail and The Telegraph. In all likelihood, they wouldn't say no to the opportunity. Then the voice is on their page, even if the opinion column is denouncing what is said. Both opinions, at the very least, would be there, rather than being an echo chamber. |
That's a fair strategy. Alternatively, they could use their majority to legislate that national media can only be owned by organisations that actually pay tax in this country. It boils my p*** that these guys are negatively influencing public narrative and policy here without being tax payers. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:24 - May 4 with 456 views | pointofblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:16 - May 4 by Plums |
That's a fair strategy. Alternatively, they could use their majority to legislate that national media can only be owned by organisations that actually pay tax in this country. It boils my p*** that these guys are negatively influencing public narrative and policy here without being tax payers. |
I think the media's relationship with the public is fascinating. Do they lead or do they follow? Do they sell Farage's image of the country's future because they believe it to be true, or because they sense that's where people's frustration is heading so are jumping on the bandwagon? Did the Sun stick with Major then switch to Blair because they saw the way things were going, rather than actively making a call and swaying the public?
I would love the national media to be owned by organisations which pay tax in this country, though they would have to tread very carefully so as not to raise allegations of interfering with free speech. It should be something they can sell to the public, especially as this would tap into the public's grievance over foreign influence. | |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 12:36 - May 4 with 447 views | NthQldITFC |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 15:19 - May 3 by JackNorthStand |
New exploration licenses will be issued in the North Sea. For context, I work in the oil and gas industry, so it would be a huge boost to North Sea oil and those within the industry. |
That does explain it. Bloody awful. |  |
| |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 13:12 - May 4 with 409 views | pointofblue |
| for all the people who suggest we shouldn't criticise reform or their voters on 19:27 - May 3 by Cheltenham_Blue |
"Politics isn’t a one size fits all", just North Sea oil and gas workers then.
What other policy gems do you have? |
But this is the point. This is why Reform is gaining ground. Because the usual response to those who, at ground level, are simply trying to protect their livelihoods and those of their children is that they're wrong. That's not the answer. It will only serve to push people away.
As said further on, the better response is, due to carbon emissions we do need to cut down on CO2 BUT we also need to protect the jobs of those who are currently working in that industry, ensuring their skills are transferable to support them via the renewable sector. Not draw up a policy that ignores a sector and hope they just go away.
(Edited because, on re-reading, there were far too many simply's and typing errors plus clunky phrasing) [Post edited 5 May 12:22]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
