[Politics] Is democracy in crisis?

[schmunk]

Or those that buy anything with a non-zero VAT rate. Which is loads.

Pedantic, but true.

 

[nicko31]

I think millions of voters simply want a leader and party that is honest and has credible policies, especially economically.
This is ultimately why Johnson and the Tories got kicked out and why Starmer and Labour appear to have lost the support of the country after just a (albeit disastrous) few months.

It hasn't been disastrous at all, people just have unrealistic expectations and the press as predicted are ridiculous IGNORE

What we have had is a disastrous period under the Tories, it started OK as a coalition but when after 23 years they finally won an election to govern alone things fell apart quickly.

We're 1/10 of the way through Labour's term

 

[dsr-burnley]

Oh, I have long been in favour of making people pass a fitness test before they can vote. My son (born in Canada) had to do citizenship test before he was allowed to become a UK citizen. And rightly so. To be able to vote I am sure some sort of equivalent test process could be invented.

The challenge would be the syllabus, and the fact that vested interest groups would attack it for bias. For example I can see numerus different 'groups' objecting to a test that affirms the equality to men of women, and people of diverse gender and orientation. Some of that is 'tough titty', some isn't.

Trouble is the Tories and Reform would oppose it citing 'rights of the British People', knowing they would lose thousands of votes from thickies who would be unable to pass the test.

The liberals would oppose it on the basis of fundamental rights.

Labour would oppose it because they would lose millions of first gen immigrant and *Muslim vo....... oh, hang on.

(*in order to avoid confusion, many people who vote on the basis of their Muslim religion not only abandoned Labour but stood against them after Starmer failed to condemn Israel quickly enough after their retaliation over the Hamas atrocity. Which 'was caused by the Jews'. Course it was. Probably reason enough to rescind their voter rights, frankly. I appreciate this may seem a bit.....authoritarian, but it pains me to see capricious ignorant members of the public voting according to the siren call of manipulators of their bigotry and prejudices, whether based around race, religion or 'Britishness'. And for further clarity I do not aim that brickbat at decent tories, liberals, labourites or greens.)

I assume it's tongue in cheek, but there genuinely are people who think that voting in elections should only be given to people who can be expected to produce the "right" result. Such people are clear opponents of democracy.

 

[dsr-burnley]

There should be no issue allowing 16 & 17 year olds to vote - they will all be adults for most of the new government's lifetime.

Shouldn't your cut-off, in that case, be at 15 and a half

There is bound to be an issue over letting 16 year olds vote. The issue is at what age you set the limit. You consider that 16 is beyond all doubt old enough to vote but 15 isn't - but someone else might think that 15 is old enough, a view that you presumably disagree with? It's fuzzy.

(I believe one mad candidate said that all people should be allowed to vote, at any age, but I won't say which party she was from because it might have been political satire. It's hard to tell nowadays.)

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I assume it's tongue in cheek, but there genuinely are people who think that voting in elections should only be given to people who can be expected to produce the "right" result. Such people are clear opponents of democracy.

I am an opponent of democracy

 

[WATFORD zero]

I am an opponent of democracy

I quite like democracy, but if that's the cost of saving us from idiocy, then so be it

 

[jcdenton08]

“We want everyone to go out and vote - your voice matters. Every vote counts.

…

No wait, I meant for vote for people we like. Stop! You’re doing it wrong! Democracy is in crisis!”

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think millions of voters simply want a leader and party that is honest and has credible policies, especially economically.
This is ultimately why Johnson and the Tories got kicked out and why Starmer and Labour appear to have lost the support of the country after just a (albeit disastrous) few months.

If the first statement is true it does not explain how Johnson was elected as PM.
He had a track record of lying and being a general buffoon.
He was elected 'to get Brexit done', not because of his honesty, credibility and economic competence.
The idea of the latter is preposterous.

Johnson was not kicked out by the electorate for economic failure.
He was kicked out by his own back benchers for being an absolute lying **** and liability likely to drag his party down the shitter.
Truss, kicked out by her own party for being truly and staggeringly incompetent to a degree the nation has never before witnessed. In a month!.
(By the time Sunk was PM the tory game was up.)

Starmer and Labour have not lost the support of the country.
All the moderates on here who voted labour expecting tough times ahead are getting exactly what they expected.
The last few months have been 'disastrous' only in the minds of those who hate labour and want them to fail.
"The worst government in 50 years", I have read.
Sure, sure. Like Fab 'our worst manager'. Delusional recency bias.

And anyone judging a government after 6 months is jumping the gun.
Even Johnson took longer than that before it fell apart.
And Johnson was still popular with millions of voters (and still is)
So popularity in itself isn't all that.

But I agree with you that Starmer needs some spin if he is to reach the inherently anti labour voters in the next GE.
That said, I am not sure I want that, personally.
I am happy with his dull vulnerability.
I'm done with charismatic silver tongued empathetic leaders for now.
Starmer vs Badenough? Who will win? Who knows

 

[abc]

If the first statement is true it does not explain how Johnson was elected as PM.
He had a track record of lying and being a general buffoon.
He was elected 'to get Brexit done', not because of his honesty, credibility and economic competence.
The idea of the latter is preposterous.

Johnson was not kicked out by the electorate for economic failure.
He was kicked out by his own back benchers for being an absolute lying **** and liability likely to drag his party down the shitter.
Truss, kicked out by her own party for being truly and staggeringly incompetent to a degree the nation has never before witnessed. In a month!.
(By the time Sunk was PM the tory game was up.)

Starmer and Labour have not lost the support of the country.
All the moderates on here who voted labour expecting tough times ahead are getting exactly what they expected.
The last few months have been 'disastrous' only in the minds of those who hate labour and want them to fail.
"The worst government in 50 years", I have read.
Sure, sure. Like Fab 'our worst manager'. Delusional recency bias.

And anyone judging a government after 6 months is jumping the gun.
Even Johnson took longer than that before it fell apart.
And Johnson was still popular with millions of voters (and still is)
So popularity in itself isn't all that.

But I agree with you that Starmer needs some spin if he is to reach the inherently anti labour voters in the next GE.
That said, I am not sure I want that, personally.
I am happy with his dull vulnerability.
I'm done with charismatic silver tongued empathetic leaders for now.
Starmer vs Badenough? Who will win? Who knows

Broadly speaking, the only part I disagree with is this:

All the moderates on here who voted labour expecting tough times ahead are getting exactly what they expected.
The last few months have been 'disastrous' only in the minds of those who hate labour and want them to fail.

Labour having to make 'tough decisions' is fine and necessary but they have made ones that will hinder growth, perpetuate the cost of living crises, add to inflation, keep interest rates higher and reduce employment opportunities. This is completely the opposite of what they claimed to want to achieve and for me this is 'disastrous' and also utterly inept. But I do not hate them and I certainly don't want them to fail. I don't like any political parties and I respect very few politicians but Labour are in government and so I truly hope my current assessment is wrong because the country needs positive change and only the incumbent government can deliver it.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Broadly speaking, the only part I disagree with is this:

All the moderates on here who voted labour expecting tough times ahead are getting exactly what they expected.
The last few months have been 'disastrous' only in the minds of those who hate labour and want them to fail.

Labour having to make 'tough decisions' is fine and necessary but they have made ones that will hinder growth, perpetuate the cost of living crises, add to inflation, keep interest rates higher and reduce employment opportunities. This is completely the opposite of what they claimed to want to achieve and for me this is 'disastrous' and also utterly inept. But I do not hate them and I certainly don't want them to fail. I don't like any political parties and I respect very few politicians but Labour are in government and so I truly hope my current assessment is wrong because the country needs positive change and only the incumbent government can deliver it.

Cheers.

I am not familiar enough with economics to be able to judge the likely impact of their policies so I defer to your knowledge and experience.
I am aware that economists seem to be a bit like historians: no two seem to agree

If you are right then this will be a one term government.

Like you I hope you are wrong

 

[Rdodge30]

Cheers.

I am not familiar enough with economics to be able to judge the likely impact of their policies so I defer to your knowledge and experience.
I am aware that economists seem to be a bit like historians: no two seem to agree



If you are right then this will ve a one term government.

Like you I hope you are wrong

I think if there were any economists reports explaining that the Labour budget will be good for growth, they would’ve been quoted on here by one of the ‘4 legs good 2legs bad Labour can do no wrong gang’