bolitics Free range Lentil, anyone? - The green party

[blandy]

 

On the second point the greens have now "clarified" that like everyone else, of course joining AQ or ISIS should be illegal.

 

when was this 'clarified'?

 

Bennett made a big thing of how she couldn't change stuff on the hoof from leadership level, they were the only truly democratic party and only the members could vote to get it changed? Was there a vote? Or did she get that democracy bit, a bit wrong?

 

It was reported by some papers on Friday

...After agreeing with Andrew Neil on the Sunday Politics earlier this month that her party did not think it should be illegal to be a member of al-Qaida or Isis, she later said she “may not have made it as clear as [she] meant to”, and that “any sort of ­involvement or membership” in the groups should be illegal.

[chrisp65]

The Guardian are certainly doing their best to try and help her out.

Which, in itself may be splitting the 'left' vote by persuading teachers in the staff room at break time that there is an alternative. But yeah, perhaps others are right. Perhaps splitting the vote and showing the posh man in the posh suit that is supposed to be 'our' man that we know he's actually just another version of 'their' man and we need to recalibrate would be a good thing in the long run.

[chrisp65]

Guardian - Leaders Debate squirm 

 

 

 

The Greens have sought to limit appearances by their leader, Natalie Bennett, during the potential leadership debates, only for the move to be blocked by the broadcasters.

 

Greens have attempted to get Lucas into the Leaders debate instead of er, erm, oh, er, cough cough, er that Gordon Barnet woman. The TV companies have said no, and pointed at the title of the show.

Looks to me like they've spotted somebody that might actually make this compulsive viewing, in a car crash kind of way.

[blandy]

I still wonder if the telly things'll happen. Cameron just doesn't want to be on the same screen as Farage. it's a shame really that Caroline Lucas, who is good on the telly won't get the chance to present the Green case, as she'd do a much better job than Bennett, based on past examples.

[tonyh29]

I still wonder if the telly things'll happen. Cameron just doesn't want to be on the same screen as Farage. it's a shame really that Caroline Lucas, who is good on the telly won't get the chance to present the Green case, as she'd do a much better job than Bennett, based on past examples.

 

at the risk of quoting Drat , aren't you then referring to Pop Idol politics rather than the policies etc

[Risso]

I still wonder if the telly things'll happen. Cameron just doesn't want to be on the same screen as Farage. it's a shame really that Caroline Lucas, who is good on the telly won't get the chance to present the Green case, as she'd do a much better job than Bennett, based on past examples.

 

Jeremy Clarkson would do a better job of presenting the Green Party case than Bennett, whilst driving an 8 litre supercar to a convention about increasing the use of CFCs.

[blandy]

 

I still wonder if the telly things'll happen. Cameron just doesn't want to be on the same screen as Farage. it's a shame really that Caroline Lucas, who is good on the telly won't get the chance to present the Green case, as she'd do a much better job than Bennett, based on past examples.

 

at the risk of quoting Drat , aren't you then referring to Pop Idol politics rather than the policies etc

 

No, definitely not.

 

It's like "Natalie can you communicate to us what your policy on this is"

"er, I feel poorly, um, cough, I don't , er,"

Caroline can you communicate what the policy is"

"yes, we want to [says clearly what they want to do]"

 

That's not pop idol, that's presenting a case well. Being coherent, clear, cogent and credible. It's about the ability of the speaker to communicate.

[MakemineVanilla]

 

 

I still wonder if the telly things'll happen. Cameron just doesn't want to be on the same screen as Farage. it's a shame really that Caroline Lucas, who is good on the telly won't get the chance to present the Green case, as she'd do a much better job than Bennett, based on past examples.

 

at the risk of quoting Drat , aren't you then referring to Pop Idol politics rather than the policies etc

 

No, definitely not.

 

It's like "Natalie can you communicate to us what your policy on this is"

"er, I feel poorly, um, cough, I don't , er,"

Caroline can you communicate what the policy is"

"yes, we want to [says clearly what they want to do]"

 

That's not pop idol, that's presenting a case well. Being coherent, clear, cogent and credible. It's about the ability of the speaker to communicate.

 

 

If she was as good at politics as she is at cricket, she'd be a shoo-in.

[Jon]

I think Nat B will do OK in the leaders debates TBH. You don't get the same level of 'grilling' in those debates - they're all about soundbites and the odd clever quip, and with some proper 'research' or prep going into them, she'll hopefully go in armed and knowing what to expect. 

 

Yes, she's not the most polished of leaders, but so what? She's a conviction politician, not a career one. Outside of the excellent Lucas, the Greens have little in the way of big hitting, competent performers under intense grilling, but I, as a Green supporter, don't care. They haven't spent years being trained in how to deal with tough interviewers, and that comes across. I like what they stand for, and the fact that they trip over themselves is actually quite refreshing. There's no hidden agenda. It' a group of people campaigning for what they believe in, and they have never had the level of exposure they have now before. 

[blandy]

Much of that is true Jon.

While no party is going to be perfect (basically party politics isn't a "good thing", anyway) I kind of agree with the Greens on the Environmental stuff and some of the social stuff. But I have a massive problem with them on a few issues, where they're IMO just ignorant.

Also, on "There's no hidden agenda. It's a group of people campaigning for what they believe in, and they have never had the level of exposure they have now before."  I don't doubt that they are as individuals  campaigning for their beliefs. I do strongly doubt that they all believe the same thing (back to Party politics being bad)

When it comes to an election at which they are suddenly getting more attention, and/or popularity, they need to be more professional in what they say and do, and how they explain their plans and policies. That's where their weakness is.

But more people in parliament with a Green outlook would be excellent.
 

[bannedfromHandV]

Uuurrrmmm, I get theres a lot of anger amongst the women folk right now but a 6pm curfew for men?

 

I think the Green Party may have just lost a few potential voters.

Edited March 12, 2021 by bannedfromHandV

[Seat68]

A curfew is just to get people talking. Its worked. I saw this, I do most of this anyway. Anything that helps females feel safer then I am cool with that. 

[Davkaus]

42 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Uuurrrmmm, I get theres a lot of anger amongst the women folk right now but a 6pm curfew for men?

 

I think the Green Party may have just lost a few potential voters.

You do realise it was a single peer, using the argument to highlight how unacceptable it is for the police to tell women they should stay indoors to not become victims, rather than being either a serious suggestion, or the policy of the Green party?

[bannedfromHandV]

2 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

You do realise it was a single peer, using the argument to highlight how unacceptable it is for the police to tell women they should stay indoors to not become victims, rather than being either a serious suggestion, or the policy of the Green party?

It’s dumb in any context and will only get peoples backs up.

And I’m pretty sure she was quite serious, I’m sure she had no real Party backing on the suggestion but that’s irrelevant.

One way to address this kind of situation is not to attack all men based on the actions of one deviant. 

[Davkaus]

How do you feel about the police telling women they shouldn't go out at night?

To be honest, I think anyone who'd consider not voting for a party due to the views of a single member, who isn't even elected probably needs to have a think. I wonder how many people who are outraged actually had any intent of considering voting Green before this. 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Davkaus

[bickster]

14 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

using the argument to highlight how unacceptable it is for the police to tell women they should stay indoors to not become victims

Was this the Police advising women not to go out to avoid being victims of off duty policemen?

[lapal_fan]

As has been said a million times, I hate walking behind women and often do the things in Seat's poster just to try and allay any fear a woman may have.

But curfewing anyone  is a stupid proposal, men or women. 

The other things I've seen on social media get my back up, things like "rather than telling women not to go out at dark, why not tell boys not to be violent", like that doesn't happen to anyone growing up, "be a dickhead Keith, attack women, make them feel scared".  One thing I do agree with is cat calling should stop and whatnot, because it makes you look like a knob and it's obviously uncomfortable for the target, among other stupid shit knobhead men do to women - get with the times. 

Another thing I've seen which slightly irritates me "men don't know what it's like to have to cross the road or stick to well lit routes to avoid men" - yes we (I) **** do, thanks - I'd call that basic survival and common sense.  I cross the road to avoid people all the time.  I avoid dark places at night, I walk quicker if I have to, run if I have to or do whatever it takes for me to feel safe.  I don't see that argument as women specific to be honest, although it probably affects them more. 

Women absolutely should feel safe anywhere, but if they think it's only women who feel anxious or unsafe outside then I think that's wrong.  

I think it comes down to just some people are bad people - the arrested guy is a 40 year old police officer isn't he?  I mean what chance do we have if he is guilty of this?  

I don't know the answer or solution (I imagine there isn't one), but I know some of the arguments are pretty silly.  

It seems like social media is again at the forefront of a stupid argument, which is somehow gaining traction - shut it down, we're not mature enough for it. 

[bannedfromHandV]

21 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

How do you feel about the police telling women they shouldn't go out at night?

To be honest, I think anyone who'd consider not voting for a party due to the views of a single member, who isn't even elected probably needs to have a think. I wonder how many people who are outraged actually had any intent of considering voting Green before this. 

I think I’ve made me feelings re the police known on multiple occasions in the past, generally speaking I tend to do the opposite of whatever the police advise.

Barely anyone votes for the Greens anyway (partly because they come up with batshit crazy stuff like this) so this is hardly going to put a dent in their ambitions I guess, but that doesn’t detract from what is probably the stupidest suggestion I’ve seen in the past 12 months, and that’s some achievement given the plethora of stupid suggestions during that period.

[Davkaus]

For what it's worth, though I'm leaning to the green party more so than any of the others at the moment, there's plenty of criticism I think is just a bit more valid. Their policies on prison sentences for women vs men is inherently sexist for example, and their opposition to Nuclear is, in my opinion, completely at odds with their other environmental ambitions.

I just think the opinions of peers is neither here nor there when it comes to voting intent.

[lapal_fan]

33 minutes ago, lapal_fan said:

As has been said a million times, I hate walking behind women and often do the things in Seat's poster just to try and allay any fear a woman may have.

But curfewing anyone  is a stupid proposal, men or women. 

The other things I've seen on social media get my back up, things like "rather than telling women not to go out at dark, why not tell boys not to be violent", like that doesn't happen to anyone growing up, "be a dickhead Keith, attack women, make them feel scared".  One thing I do agree with is cat calling should stop and whatnot, because it makes you look like a knob and it's obviously uncomfortable for the target, among other stupid shit knobhead men do to women - get with the times. 

Another thing I've seen which slightly irritates me "men don't know what it's like to have to cross the road or stick to well lit routes to avoid men" - yes we (I) **** do, thanks - I'd call that basic survival and common sense.  I cross the road to avoid people all the time.  I avoid dark places at night, I walk quicker if I have to, run if I have to or do whatever it takes for me to feel safe.  I don't see that argument as women specific to be honest, although it probably affects them more. 

Women absolutely should feel safe anywhere, but if they think it's only women who feel anxious or unsafe outside then I think that's wrong.  

I think it comes down to just some people are bad people - the arrested guy is a 40 year old police officer isn't he?  I mean what chance do we have if he is guilty of this?  

I don't know the answer or solution (I imagine there isn't one), but I know some of the arguments are pretty silly.  

It seems like social media is again at the forefront of a stupid argument, which is somehow gaining traction - shut it down, we're not mature enough for it. 

Quoting myself because after re-reading it reads like I don't give a **** about the problem, when in fact I do.  

My problem is probably frustration that anyone should have to feel unsafe.  I mean, do we really need lessons in how not to hurt, rape, be violent to other people?  It's mental.

Just be kind to each other and stop being massive pricks.  The fact a police officer potentially did this crime is even more angering and enraging.  

People in general are alright, but **** hell there are a lot of bastards around.  

We have really good education in this country, mandatory education.  Education that billions around the world are envious of and yet we still see **** ups who are ignorant, lazy arseholes who throw that opportunity away everyday and don't want to learn - ignorance is bliss, until legally it isn't an excuse.  

It's indicative of the system/culture we live in and as we've seen from history - there's no perfect system.  We're a violent species and you won't "coach" that out of everyone, even with all of the opportunities afforded to us.  

Keep reminding yourselves that we too, are animals and as we can see in every living creature, every ecosystem and in every nook and cranny around the entire space rock we're floating around on, it's survival of the fittest and no amount of education will stop those feelings and compulsions in every single one of us as sad as that is.  But then I guess, if we don't bring it to light, then we aren't fighting it and that too is a problem.

Edited March 12, 2021 by lapal_fan