BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Ballysmate wrote:If this was a general election I could more readily accept the argument of the young feeling apathy, but it is about an issue that transcends party politics and according to some people, will affect the young more than any other generation. And still, it seems, they will be the least bothered to vote.
they are lazy but more could be done to alleviate the problem. Young people move around more so are more likely to fall off the register. Why have to vote near your home address on a Thursday 7-10:00, the young lead more erratic lifestyles so this could be changed.0 -
Ballysmate wrote:If this was a general election I could more readily accept the argument of the young feeling apathy, but it is about an issue that transcends party politics and according to some people, will affect the young more than any other generation. And still, it seems, they will be the least bothered to vote.
It's a vicious circle, by the narrow politics of Westminster.
Politics actively favours the old over the young, so the young wonder why bother getting engaged.
They work longer hours than older people, and are in periods in their career which is much more focused on day-to-day work, so they are less likely to see the impact over more senior staff.
The young have been brought up in an era where politicians have been universally despised since they were in nappies, so there is significantly more distrust in the process and system. The press they've grown up with is more interested in where politicians put their genitalia than their policies, or their bank balance before they went into politics.
They only know a world where Westminster is far removed from the everyday life they lead.
And then when the young do get engaged their get called upstarts and they're vilified.
Junior Drs get sh!t for being political.
Younger people tend to be more issue focused over Westminster anyway, so they are not picked up by traditional politics.
They campaign for social values around things like sexism, racism, LGBT, and the environment. These are issues that are regularly put down by the older establishment generation. Rather like you do Bally.
This new young generation are smarter, work longer hours, and are healthier than any generation beforehand. They are just as political as any other generation. They just don't carry truck with party politics and tribalism.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:Ballysmate wrote:If this was a general election I could more readily accept the argument of the young feeling apathy, but it is about an issue that transcends party politics and according to some people, will affect the young more than any other generation. And still, it seems, they will be the least bothered to vote.
they are lazy but more could be done to alleviate the problem. Young people move around more so are more likely to fall off the register. Why have to vote near your home address on a Thursday 7-10:00, the young lead more erratic lifestyles so this could be changed.
I take your point about the voters register. But the surveys suggest youngsters are less likely to vote, not less able.
Erratic lifestyle? There are options. Postal vote? Proxy vote.? 15 hours the polls open for, long enough for most other people.
Perhaps Simon Cowell could get them to text their vote in?
0 -
I take my youngest kids with me when I vote, and explain my choice to them afterwards. (I also take them with me to blood donation sessions) I took my older two when they were young, the oldest is now eighteen and keen to vote in the referendum, but frankly there is bugger all publicity for the council elections and he is in the dark about what the local parties represent. It's lib dem v tory in my council and there's bugger all difference between them.
There have been plenty of initiatives to reach the elderly over the years, eg visiting care homes to enable voting, but bugger all to change the system to suit the young. Apart from the Scottish referendum, of course which Westminister refused to carry forward.0 -
I agree with Rick in that it's a self-perpetuating cycle. Politicians pander to older people since they're more likely to vote, which in turn makes younger people feel disenfranchised and reinforces that there's no point voting.
I think if you look at independent issue-based campaigns and fundraising it bears out Rick's other point that younger people tend to be more issue focussed and not really interested in party politics.Surrey Commuter wrote:
Young people move around more so are more likely to fall off the register
Yup I've had 6 addresses since I left university 6 years ago - I only got around to registering in Scotland so I could vote in the independence referendum (after living there 2.5 years) and I've just re-registered in England so I can vote in the EU referendum.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Ballysmate wrote:If this was a general election I could more readily accept the argument of the young feeling apathy, but it is about an issue that transcends party politics and according to some people, will affect the young more than any other generation. And still, it seems, they will be the least bothered to vote.
It's a vicious circle, by the narrow politics of Westminster.
This issue is nothing to do with Westminster
Politics actively favours the old over the young, so the young wonder why bother getting engaged.
As has been posted on here, it is felt that this issue impacts the young more than any other generation.
They work longer hours than older people, and are in periods in their career which is much more focused on day-to-day work, so they are less likely to see the impact over more senior staff.
Even if this were true, nothing stops them voting by post or proxy.
is quite dismissive don't you think? By your reasoning, perhaps they shouldn't get to vote. As an aside, most people will not have careers, they will have jobs.so they are less likely to see the impact over more senior staff
The young have been brought up in an era where politicians have been universally despised since they were in nappies, so there is significantly more distrust in the process and system. The press they've grown up with is more interested in where politicians put their genitalia than their policies, or their bank balance before they went into politics.
You may have a point about politicians being despised. All this hate from the left, branding people scum just for having the temerity to vote Tory.
They only know a world where Westminster is far removed from the everyday life they lead.
True. But no further removed from the life I lead.
And then when the young do get engaged their get called upstarts and they're vilified.
Perhaps true. Remember William Hague being made fun of because he spoke at the party conference at 16?
Junior Drs get sh!t for being political.
So the strike isn't about an unsafe contract then? Quelle surprise!
Younger people tend to be more issue focused over Westminster anyway, so they are not picked up by traditional politics.
This IS a single issue.
They campaign for social values around things like sexism, racism, LGBT, and the environment. These are issues that are regularly put down by the older establishment generation. Rather like you do Bally.
Have I put these down?
This new young generation are smarter, work longer hours, and are healthier than any generation beforehand. They are just as political as any other generation. They just don't carry truck with party politics and tribalism.
If they are that smart why don't they vote. And why did you write
Work longer hours? If I could be bothered to look, I'm sure there's a discussion on the high levels of youth unemployment on here. Regardless, being in work is no excuse for not bothering to vote..so they are less likely to see the impact over more senior staff0 -
bobmcstuff wrote:I agree with Rick in that it's a self-perpetuating cycle. Politicians pander to older people since they're more likely to vote, which in turn makes younger people feel disenfranchised and reinforces that there's no point voting.
I think if you look at independent issue-based campaigns and fundraising it bears out Rick's other point that younger people tend to be more issue focussed and not really interested in party politics.Surrey Commuter wrote:
Young people move around more so are more likely to fall off the register
Yup I've had 6 addresses since I left university 6 years ago - I only got around to registering in Scotland so I could vote in the independence referendum (after living there 2.5 years) and I've just re-registered in England so I can vote in the EU referendum.
So you think politicians dismiss you because you don't vote and because of this, you don't vote. What better incentive do you need? To change things and have a voice, you have to vote.0 -
Ballysmate wrote:bobmcstuff wrote:I agree with Rick in that it's a self-perpetuating cycle. Politicians pander to older people since they're more likely to vote, which in turn makes younger people feel disenfranchised and reinforces that there's no point voting.
I think if you look at independent issue-based campaigns and fundraising it bears out Rick's other point that younger people tend to be more issue focussed and not really interested in party politics.Surrey Commuter wrote:
Young people move around more so are more likely to fall off the register
Yup I've had 6 addresses since I left university 6 years ago - I only got around to registering in Scotland so I could vote in the independence referendum (after living there 2.5 years) and I've just re-registered in England so I can vote in the EU referendum.
So you think politicians dismiss you because you don't vote and because of this, you don't vote. What better incentive do you need? To change things and have a voice, you have to vote.
I exaggerated slightly - I did vote in the last general election. However since I was living in Scotland at the time my vote was pretty much pointless because a gibbon in an SNP rosette would have been able to get elected in most constituencies. P!ssing in the proverbial wind.0 -
Ballysmate wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Ballysmate wrote:If this was a general election I could more readily accept the argument of the young feeling apathy, but it is about an issue that transcends party politics and according to some people, will affect the young more than any other generation. And still, it seems, they will be the least bothered to vote.
they are lazy but more could be done to alleviate the problem. Young people move around more so are more likely to fall off the register. Why have to vote near your home address on a Thursday 7-10:00, the young lead more erratic lifestyles so this could be changed.
I take your point about the voters register. But the surveys suggest youngsters are less likely to vote, not less able.
Erratic lifestyle? There are options. Postal vote? Proxy vote.? 15 hours the polls open for, long enough for most other people.
Perhaps Simon Cowell could get them to text their vote in?
why not let them text a vote, or vote online, or have polling on a Sunday, or 48 hours
Labour are idiots for not thinking this through between 1997 and 20100 -
Some sort of app would be good. Works for banking why not voting?0
-
Ballysmate wrote:The young have been brought up in an era where politicians have been universally despised since they were in nappies, so there is significantly more distrust in the process and system. The press they've grown up with is more interested in where politicians put their genitalia than their policies, or their bank balance before they went into politics.
You may have a point about politicians being despised. All this hate from the left, branding people scum just for having the temerity to vote Tory.]
Do you understand that with that pathetic line you totally devalue everything else you said in the eyes of anyone not interested in party politics?We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
On the contrary, anyone not interested in party politics should be deeply concerned at the fact - perhaps I should even say FACT - that it is considered acceptable to heap abuse on anyone simply because they vote a different way to you. I have actually and literally been called scum to my face for voting tory, far more so online, so what exactly is it that makes Bally's comment pathetic?ddraver wrote:Ballysmate wrote:The young have been brought up in an era where politicians have been universally despised since they were in nappies, so there is significantly more distrust in the process and system. The press they've grown up with is more interested in where politicians put their genitalia than their policies, or their bank balance before they went into politics.
You may have a point about politicians being despised. All this hate from the left, branding people scum just for having the temerity to vote Tory.]
Do you understand that with that pathetic line you totally devalue everything else you said in the eyes of anyone not interested in party politics?0 -
ddraver wrote:Ballysmate wrote:The young have been brought up in an era where politicians have been universally despised since they were in nappies, so there is significantly more distrust in the process and system. The press they've grown up with is more interested in where politicians put their genitalia than their policies, or their bank balance before they went into politics.
You may have a point about politicians being despised. All this hate from the left, branding people scum just for having the temerity to vote Tory.]
Do you understand that with that pathetic line you totally devalue everything else you said in the eyes of anyone not interested in party politics?
Yes it was a party politics dig but does everything else posted suddenly become less valid?0 -
Surely Cameron should now resign, his decision to give us a vote on EU in/out, means we could now face WAR in europe.
What sort of leader would risk this in an ill thought out referendum? either that or he is a lying scumbag ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... -into-war/
he clearly has no shame.0 -
Something tell me you're not too keen on Cameron.mamba80 wrote:Surely Cameron should now resign, his decision to give us a vote on EU in/out, means we could now face WAR in europe.
What sort of leader would risk this in an ill thought out referendum? either that or he is a lying scumbag ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... -into-war/
he clearly has no shame.
I case you forgot, the Tories were elected on the back of a manifesto pledge to give us a referendum."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Young people have grown up in a world where the individual has been emphasised more than the collective. I reckon that impacts on how likely they are to vote in a few ways - partly they are less tribal (you can see that in the lack of youth cultures, the lack of strong class identification and lower identification with political parties amongst other things) but partly also they are less inclined to see the point in doing something just because it's a civic duty. Even if you agree totally with the Tories or Labour your individual vote is highly unlikely to benefit you so why bother.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0
-
Stevo 666 wrote:
Something tell me you're not too keen on Cameron.mamba80 wrote:Surely Cameron should now resign, his decision to give us a vote on EU in/out, means we could now face WAR in europe.
What sort of leader would risk this in an ill thought out referendum? either that or he is a lying scumbag ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... -into-war/
he clearly has no shame.
I case you forgot, the Tories were elected on the back of a manifesto pledge to give us a referendum.
sorry if i ve given you that impression!
of course they had this in their manifesto and thats the point, IF the dangers of exit are so huge (and you dont much bigger than the danger of another european war) then who in their right mind would risk such a thing on a fickle electorate?
i see now that Boris is asking exactly the same question.0 -
Whether or not anyone actually likes Cameron (and I sense his popularity is definitely on the wane), I think it is perfectly legitimate to question his recent comments threatening that a Brexit could result in war. Let's face it, leaving the EU COULD result in lots of things but threatening a war just makes him seem to be a desperate man in a desperate place.
The news regarding a German veto in the "renegotiation" facade doesn't actually reveal much, more a case of confirming that the EU is beginning to look more and more like a German superstate and no other Government seems to wants to get out due to the risk of being left without some gravy on their chops.0 -
War? Really? Do you believe that?mamba80 wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Something tell me you're not too keen on Cameron.mamba80 wrote:Surely Cameron should now resign, his decision to give us a vote on EU in/out, means we could now face WAR in europe.
What sort of leader would risk this in an ill thought out referendum? either that or he is a lying scumbag ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... -into-war/
he clearly has no shame.
I case you forgot, the Tories were elected on the back of a manifesto pledge to give us a referendum.
sorry if i ve given you that impression!
of course they had this in their manifesto and thats the point, IF the dangers of exit are so huge (and you dont much bigger than the danger of another european war) then who in their right mind would risk such a thing on a fickle electorate?
i see now that Boris is asking exactly the same question."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Our illlustrious leader seems to think that it should be a concern.Stevo 666 wrote:
War? Really? Do you believe that?mamba80 wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Something tell me you're not too keen on Cameron.mamba80 wrote:Surely Cameron should now resign, his decision to give us a vote on EU in/out, means we could now face WAR in europe.
What sort of leader would risk this in an ill thought out referendum? either that or he is a lying scumbag ?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05 ... -into-war/
he clearly has no shame.
I case you forgot, the Tories were elected on the back of a manifesto pledge to give us a referendum.
sorry if i ve given you that impression!
of course they had this in their manifesto and thats the point, IF the dangers of exit are so huge (and you dont much bigger than the danger of another european war) then who in their right mind would risk such a thing on a fickle electorate?
i see now that Boris is asking exactly the same question.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
They're already in power in case you hadn't noticed. Still in denial about the GE result?mamba80 wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:War? Really? Do you believe that?
So either your hero Cameron and the Tories are lying scumbags, intent on getting into power and their own way by saying anything that will get them both or he is correct...... ?
you tell me Steve0 ? I don't think he is correct.
Both sides are scaremongering, it is expected where there is a lot at stake."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
They're already in power in case you hadn't noticed. Still in denial about the GE result?mamba80 wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:War? Really? Do you believe that?
So either your hero Cameron and the Tories are lying scumbags, intent on getting into power and their own way by saying anything that will get them both or he is correct...... ?
you tell me Steve0 ? I don't think he is correct.
Both sides are scaremongering, it is expected where there is a lot at stake.
You mean WAR is at stake? scaremongering is another way of saying he is lying, i have nt heard the OUT people, stating such outlandish claims, theirs seems to be more wishful thinking.
how can any of us make an informed decision like this when, as you say both sides are lying about the consequences/advantages?
this is why there shouldnt have been a vote.
i meant that the Tories promised the ref vote before they had won the GE, purely to win UKIP votes and that they were irresponsible in doing this IF the consequences of UK leaving are so severe.0 -
You seem to be the only one getting hot under the collar about this. The press isn't bothered either so calm down.
As with everything, do your own research and come to your own conclusions.
Which way will you be voting BTW?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:The press isn't bothered either so calm down.
Which way will you be voting BTW?
not surprising, very difficult for them to know which gaff to lead on
i ll be voting IN but i suspect as a country we ll vote OUT, will be very close though and touching on another thread, either way, will leave a very large number of people ignored, another reason why we should never have had this vote.0 -
mamba80 wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:The press isn't bothered either so calm down.
Which way will you be voting BTW?
not surprising, very difficult for them to know which gaff to lead on
i ll be voting IN but i suspect as a country we ll vote OUT, will be very close though and touching on another thread, either way, will leave a very large number of people ignored, another reason why we should never have had this vote.
A strange position. You bemoan the fact that following the referendum many people will feel ignored, but IF as you fear there is a majority for Brexit, you would have been more than happy for this majority to continue to be ignored by refusing them a referendum.0 -
Maybe so, maybe not.mamba80 wrote:i ll be voting IN but i suspect as a country we ll vote OUT, will be very close though and touching on another thread, either way, will leave a very large number of people ignored, another reason why we should never have had this vote.
It is however deflecting from worsening economic figures. Mission acclomplished?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Let me get this right - the Tory party is tearing itself apart over Europe; its leading figures are going for each others' throats, and the damage might take a long time to heal, if ever; why, it's almost starting to make Labour look like a sensible alternative.PBlakeney wrote:
Maybe so, maybe not.mamba80 wrote:i ll be voting IN but i suspect as a country we ll vote OUT, will be very close though and touching on another thread, either way, will leave a very large number of people ignored, another reason why we should never have had this vote.
It is however deflecting from worsening economic figures. Mission acclomplished?
And Cameron knew perfectly well this would happen.
Yet you really think it's just a cynical stunt?
Sometimes I think people ascribe politicians a Machiavellian intelligence which is clearly just not there.0 -
bompington wrote:Yet you really think it's just a cynical stunt?No.
It is quite convenient though, and some have forecast the downturn for some time.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0
