Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Why can't politicians accept it when they lost?


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, ForGreatLager... said:

Agreed. People seemed to get very muddled up with who was just campaigning and who actually had the power to make things happen. The bus slogan never actually promised anything, and yet people got in a right state about it (and still do!)

“We send the EU £350 million a week. Let’s fund our NHS instead.”

It’s merely a suggestion, worded very carefully as to not commit to anything. 

Jesus wept, so mealy-mouthed slogans are okay in your book :(. What a way to run a country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I do believe that our current PM went around telling a lot of fishermen they would be better off as part of the campaign trail. A lot of fishermen voted on that basis and now saying they were lied to so square that circle. BJ was even smirking as he said it was C19 not his deal causing them to go out of business last night and floating his £23m support package... for ref one of those affected lost £150k in the first day and estimated £100k a day losses on live exports from his business.

NI businesses were promised no checks or paperwork during campaign by official Leave. Gove and Johnson both part of it and repeated claims in gov. Now customs checks and paperwork.

So saying the wording on the bus means nothing and the people promising stuff aren't in a position to govern kind of deflects from those who said things and ended up in Gov.

Now you can argue that Leave and gov were two separate entities and therefore when they changed hats they changed policy, but still leaves a bitter taste for those who if asked would say they were lied to and betrayed ( and are doing vociferously)

Edited by Staffsknot
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Staffsknot said:

.. therefore when they changed hats they changed policy, but still leaves a bitter taste for those who if asked would say they were lied to and betrayed ( and are doing vociferously)

I think this is a general problem with elected officials.  What comeback do the electorate ever have if, once in power, the politician does not follow through on what were understood to be electoral promises?  Sure, they might not be elected again - but if the same problems affect the whole of politics, perhaps they are no worse than their competion - and there's no net consequence when the next votes are cast?

Business people would talk about having 'skin in the game' - and ensuring people with authority have aligned motives.  This doesn't seem to be the case for the relationship between politicians and the electorate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

I haven't got a bee in my bonnet about sovereignty, but we were a sovereign state before, during and after our membership of the EU.

I don't trust our populist government any further than I could throw it, so would prefer to have the checks and balances that go with being a member of the EU.

The checks and balances of being part of something even less democratically accountable that can still set laws, where the only way to avoid them is to leave? That lack of accountability (and the level of power it's got anyway) are two of the more offputting aspects of the EU. That we've got useless politicians is beside the point - what checks and balances are there to stop the EU getting even more useless people running it, who we can do even less about? Just because you think they don't have them (in comparison) right now, is there any reason to believe that's more than simply luck (in the same way as you can end up with a decent king in an absolute monarchy)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/01/2021 at 13:09, Si1 said:

I'm thinking, from different political points:

-Gordon Brown who never accepted that he got his ass kicked in the 2010 General Election

-Remoaners

-MAGA people

 

I mean maybe you had the superior economic, moral, social policies, I don't know. But that's not that point of democracy. You have to accept when you lost and get on with life. Like when Gordon Brown won the 2005 election, it was horrible, but we're better off with fairly democratically governments even if they're not the one we think is best.

 

What is it with this passionate refusal to accept democracy?

There’s also the infamous comment by Nigel Farage of course, and presumably the Scots will be leaving the UK If nothing changes. 

The MAGA lot are living in an alternative reality where they won, in contrast  Trunp started trying to fiddle the outcome before the election so it seems highly likely he knows he lost. Presumably he will focus on getting re-elected democratically but, well too big a mess to summarise.

‘Remoaners’  picked apart the loss,  there was dodgy Russian/SM involvement etc, and attempted and failed to hold the winners to account for what they promised. They will focus on continuing to monitor the outcome, mending relations with the EU and the RoW and at some point rejoining, Leavers will insist it’s not allowed for x decades.

Gordon Brown was weirdly fecking stubborn - he perhaps comes closest to your description, at least temporarily. Seems quite chilled now - maybe being out of power suits him lol? Maybe that’s unkind :)

So Im trying to extrapolate GB to the other situations, but only getting so far before it breaks down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The checks and balances of being part of something even less democratically accountable that can still set laws, where the only way to avoid them is to leave? That lack of accountability (and the level of power it's got anyway) are two of the more offputting aspects of the EU. That we've got useless politicians is beside the point - what checks and balances are there to stop the EU getting even more useless people running it, who we can do even less about? Just because you think they don't have them (in comparison) right now, is there any reason to believe that's more than simply luck (in the same way as you can end up with a decent king in an absolute monarchy)?

...and you think we have 'checks and balances' here?

From a Government that wanted to use Prerogative Powers from Henry VIII to deal with Brussels?

From a Government that is happy with 'Super Injunctions' where you can't even mention you are being gagged?

From a Government where 'promises' for members to be actual UK citizens are ignored to favour tax avoiders.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pig said:

There’s also the infamous comment by Nigel Farage of course, and presumably the Scots will be leaving the UK If nothing changes. 

The MAGA lot are living in an alternative reality where they won, in contrast  Trunp started trying to fiddle the outcome before the election so it seems highly likely he knows he lost. Presumably he will focus on getting re-elected democratically but, well too big a mess to summarise.

‘Remoaners’  picked apart the loss,  there was dodgy Russian/SM involvement etc, and attempted and failed to hold the winners to account for what they promised. They will focus on continuing to monitor the outcome, mending relations with the EU and the RoW and at some point rejoining, Leavers will insist it’s not allowed for x decades.

Gordon Brown was weirdly fecking stubborn - he perhaps comes closest to your description, at least temporarily. Seems quite chilled now - maybe being out of power suits him lol? Maybe that’s unkind :)

So Im trying to extrapolate GB to the other situations, but only getting so far before it breaks down.

+1  World of difference from analyising the result and making sure victors are accountable to the bat sh*t crazy loons that challenge everything apart from their own madness (cos you part of the Lizard elite if you are, innit).

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2021 at 2:28 PM, spacedin said:

I think it's complicated by the fact that the last general election was used as a proxy vote on Brexit.

Therefore the question is whether Labour lost because of their policies or because of Brexit. The answer is a combiniation of the two but you'd have to be crazy to think that Brexit didn't play a huge part in the result. 

The response from Keir Starmer's Labour is basically to try and go back to the New Labour days, despite promoising to 'honour the key pledges' of the Jeremy Corbyn administration in order to get elected. 

This is despite many of those policies, like free education etc being much more popular with younger voters. Thus it's fine to be told that Labour lost the election but I imagine a bit irritating to be told it's because of how far to the left Labour were.

It's all rather comical given it was Keir Starmer's ilk that were pushing for a 'peoples vote' at the time not Jeremy Corbyn and co.

Agreed. Corbyn's Labour policies polled as popular.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, msi said:

...and you think we have 'checks and balances' here?

From a Government that wanted to use Prerogative Powers from Henry VIII to deal with Brussels?

From a Government that is happy with 'Super Injunctions' where you can't even mention you are being gagged?

From a Government where 'promises' for members to be actual UK citizens are ignored to favour tax avoiders.

I was mostly pointing out criticism of the EU rather than defence of the UK. It's an all too common mistake to assume that taking a dim view of one thing implies devoted support to the other (certainly seen it a lot in Brexit arguments, with a great many Remainers taking the rather simple position that if you don't like the EU you must think the UK's fine, which is hardly a logical assumption). But we do at least have elections, so yes, we've got slightly better accountability towards the people affected by the decisions. You don't have to look hard to see that it's not working very well and is far from perfect but again, another common mistake, equating a lack of perfection with useless when it suits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Pimp My Pants said:

Labour Centrists (Labour right) went into meltdown when Corbyn got elected leader twice and tried every trick in the book to get him out. They are so frightened of his ghost coming back to haunt them they are still trying to get him out,

I think the right, the Labour right, the liberals are all trying.

Ensure that everyone thinks left policies will be the undoing of civilisation as we know it whilst some of us do very nicely out the remaining status quo. 😉

Not sure I would want a true left leader running the country but I wouldn’t mind a real left opposition making a right government more accountable. 

At the moment we have neither nowt nor something just everyone just protecting their own interests.

Still it could be worse....as I look across the pond. 🤦🏻‍♂️🇺🇸
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Pop321 said:

I think the right, the Labour right, the liberals are all trying.

Ensure that everyone thinks left policies will be the undoing of civilisation as we know it whilst some of us do very nicely out the remaining status quo. 😉

Not sure I would want a true left leader running the country but I wouldn’t mind a real left opposition making a right government more accountable. 

At the moment we have neither nowt nor something just everyone just protecting their own interests.

Still it could be worse....as I look across the pond. 🤦🏻‍♂️🇺🇸
 

But most people are pragmatic centrists, perhaps at most left or right flavoured.

The ends of the spectrum try to get round this with 'two sides -ism' trying buttress wacky views as 'the other side' of an equal argument when often its anything but.

You can try goad people rightward (the Centre is the Left or the 'liberal elite') or left (the Centre is the Right or 'you're just a Tory').

Either way, as has happened in America, the idea is 'unground' people closer to either extreme, or somewhere worse...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ForGreatLager... said:

Agreed. People seemed to get very muddled up with who was just campaigning and who actually had the power to make things happen. The bus slogan never actually promised anything, and yet people got in a right state about it (and still do!)

“We send the EU £350 million a week. Let’s fund our NHS instead.”

It’s merely a suggestion, worded very carefully as to not commit to anything. 

Sure - as was 'advisory' referendum ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Riedquat said:

The checks and balances of being part of something even less democratically accountable that can still set laws, where the only way to avoid them is to leave? That lack of accountability (and the level of power it's got anyway) are two of the more offputting aspects of the EU. That we've got useless politicians is beside the point - what checks and balances are there to stop the EU getting even more useless people running it, who we can do even less about? Just because you think they don't have them (in comparison) right now, is there any reason to believe that's more than simply luck (in the same way as you can end up with a decent king in an absolute monarchy)?

The checks and balances are 27 sovereign countries and ultimately the ability to leave ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/01/2021 at 16:09, mrlegend123 said:

never right and sometimes biased.

better odds at the betting shop

polls are not accurate like they used to be because of a simple fact. 

The people on the right now tend to keep how they will vote to themselves due to how they are being attacked and pushed over for jobs within mainly the public sector. claiming your not happy with immigration or your in favour of many right wing policies or even that you vote conservative stops you now progressing within many workplaces. extolling and wrapping yourself and flagwaving multiculturalism and inclusion policies gets you up the greasy pole.  this is why polls are not accurate the left have created a position of closing down free speech and diffrent opinions that can only be fought back in the polling booth. Hence every poll in last 10 years has been wrong showing a less right vote that it actually turned out to be. its now got to the point that polsters are starting to try and work out this divergence percentage when making their predictions. 

thats the sad and dangerous point we are at in what used to be a democracy. the left never did like democracy that much though, especially the kind where they lose. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one was the scottish independence referendum, half of scotland have never accepted. we are turning out like many countries we consider to have less justice and honesty. our system has worked for a long time and half the world based its system on ours. but lately we have diverged from what was good and served us fair and proper. and all because the left just wont accept when they have lost anymore. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Riedquat said:

I was mostly pointing out criticism of the EU rather than defence of the UK. It's an all too common mistake to assume that taking a dim view of one thing implies devoted support to the other (certainly seen it a lot in Brexit arguments, with a great many Remainers taking the rather simple position that if you don't like the EU you must think the UK's fine, which is hardly a logical assumption). But we do at least have elections, so yes, we've got slightly better accountability towards the people affected by the decisions. You don't have to look hard to see that it's not working very well and is far from perfect but again, another common mistake, equating a lack of perfection with useless when it suits.

Generally when you show the shortcoming of one view, you show the benefits of the other view - if not, then it would be safe to presume this as the absence of that would make you a moaning minnie with nothing to contribute.  A lot of the Brexidiots were happy to moan about 'unelected' EU, despite voting for MEPs...only then to fall back to the 'unelected executive' argument, despite the UK never electing any executive member (remember you only vote for an MP nothing more).

I've yet to see a coherent argument quantifiably showing the EU lack of democracy - not to say the EU is a paragon of transparency, but I'd would posit that it is comparable and not the totalitarian superstate that some on the rabid right would make out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Staffsknot said:

So saying the wording on the bus means nothing and the people promising stuff aren't in a position to govern kind of deflects from those who said things and ended up in Gov.

No. I didn’t say the wording on the bus meant nothing. I’m saying that people have gotten upset about an imagined promise. The bus slogan was a very cleverly worded piece intended to stir emotions of wasting money on a distant bureaucratic organisation and instead funding a much loved national institution (deliberate use of Logo). It intentionally does not promise to give £350m every week to the NHS. Objectively, there within the slogan could be the mistruth about exactly how much money is sent every week. But what people seemed to have gotten upset about was an imagined promise to give the NHS £350m every week. There simply was no promise to do this. 

This is politics; it’s all about avoiding responsibility and claiming triumph for doing nothing. ‘Unprecedented’ seems to be the word used these days to preempt any responsibility for future failings. You may also have noticed how politicians now say that they ‘want’ to do something, rather than say they ‘are’ going to do something. Thisting...... it’s all about making sure they don’t commit to anything. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ForGreatLager... said:

No. I didn’t say the wording on the bus meant nothing. I’m saying that people have gotten upset about an imagined promise. The bus slogan was a very cleverly worded piece intended to stir emotions of wasting money on a distant bureaucratic organisation and instead funding a much loved national institution (deliberate use of Logo). It intentionally does not promise to give £350m every week to the NHS. Objectively, there within the slogan could be the mistruth about exactly how much money is sent every week. But what people seemed to have gotten upset about was an imagined promise to give the NHS £350m every week. There simply was no promise to do this. 

This is politics; it’s all about avoiding responsibility and claiming triumph for doing nothing. ‘Unprecedented’ seems to be the word used these days to preempt any responsibility for future failings. You may also have noticed how politicians now say that they ‘want’ to do something, rather than say they ‘are’ going to do something. Thisting...... it’s all about making sure they don’t commit to anything. 

If you are splitting hairs about mealy mouth statements then you need to look at yourself in the mirror.  Was Henry II innocent of Thomas Beckets death because he only asked  'will no one rid me of (him)'?  (I'll avoid a the more recent example to avoid the drooling trolls doing the rounds)

The implications of the Big Red Bus was a diverting of EU payments into Public Services - Let's see how that pans out.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, msi said:

Generally when you show the shortcoming of one view, you show the benefits of the other view - if not, then it would be safe to presume this as the absence of that would make you a moaning minnie with nothing to contribute.  A lot of the Brexidiots were happy to moan about 'unelected' EU, despite voting for MEPs...only then to fall back to the 'unelected executive' argument, despite the UK never electing any executive member (remember you only vote for an MP nothing more).

I've yet to see a coherent argument quantifiably showing the EU lack of democracy - not to say the EU is a paragon of transparency, but I'd would posit that it is comparable and not the totalitarian superstate that some on the rabid right would make out.

So let's see what we've got here - it's one side or the other, black and white (so no room for the concept that they could both be good, both be crap, or anywhere in between), insults ("Brexidiots" and "moaning minnie with nothing to contribute"), and shifting of goalposts (there's no lack of democracy because it's not a totalitarian superstate - back to one extreme or the other there).

If you swapped the House of Commons and House of Lords roles around, so the Commons did the job of the Lords and vice-versa, but we still voted for the Commons, would the UK have a serious lack of democracy? I don't think many people would accept it even if the members of the Lords were appointed by the Commons. For the EU to be democratic policy needs to be decided by MEPs. Or the level of its powers scaled back sufficiently that it doesn't matter.

Edited by Riedquat
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

So let's see what we've got here - it's one side or the other, black and white (so no room for the concept that they could both be good, both be crap, or anywhere in between), insults ("Brexidiots" and "moaning minnie with nothing to contribute"), and shifting of goalposts (there's no lack of democracy because it's not a totalitarian superstate - back to one extreme or the other there).

I'll apologise for my tone as I read your previous post of 'Remainer' for 'Remoaner'.  However I'm going to support my assertion that criticism of one side is completed with a support for alternate views (I don't think the world is flat and part of my critque for that is the evidence supporting the world is round).

 

Of course there is merit in both sides, only by bringing them together can you have constructive analysis. I thought you fired the first shot with Remoaner so I countered (and I apologise again for not reading properly).  The Remain argument was pushed back with PrOjeCtFeAR and the Brexit argument boiled down to 'FrEeDoM'.  My nature is eurosceptic, but looking at the loons arguing on Turkey's accession, Bendy bananas, Vaccumes, and spurious points made me despair and support the status-quo as no credible (IMO) plan was given. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.