Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

Who will you be voting for?

  • Tory

    Votes: 38 9.9%

  • Diet Tory (Labour)

    Votes: 132 34.3%

  • Tory Zero (Greens)

    Votes: 44 11.4%

  • Extra Tory with lemon (UKIP)

    Votes: 40 10.4%

  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 9 2.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 31 8.1%

  • Cheese on toast

    Votes: 91 23.6%
  • Total voters
    385
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
peteblue said:
I've no idea tbh, and wouldn't even know her name, but this head to head malarky is now just becoming a TV stunt where the TV can pick and choose who, what and when. Get out of the TV studio, get around the bloody country and talk to people. Tell them what you stand for, answer questions and we can make our mind up. This bloody Xfactor political nonsense should be consigned to the dustbin. Just because it's good telly doesn't make it good politics......we vote for a party not a leader like the US do......
Click to expand...

Not even good telly tbh.
 
Bruce Wayne said:
I'm sure. We've seen in this very thread that logic can get over-run by hysteria.
Click to expand...

What an arrogant and patronising comment to make. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking your "logic" has been rather lacking at times.

You maintain a pretense of being above party politics and point scoring and affect a 'yearning' for intelligent debate and yet on the last two pages alone you've offered a rather dismissive "I'm sure" and [on the subject of televised debate] "These things are generally a waste of time anyway." It was hilarious, by the way, that you reached for the "studies show that they have little effect" line of attack. Who'd have expected that one, eh?

The irony is that whilst you bleat on about the level of debate, you yourself are becoming less and less credible on this thread.
 
Last edited:
Clint Planet said:
What an arrogant and patronising comment to make. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking your "logic" has been rather lacking at times.

You maintain a pretense of being above party politics and point scoring and adopt a 'yearning' for intelligent debate and yet on the last two pages alone you've offered a rsther dismissive "I'm sure" and [on the subject of televised debate] "These things are generally a waste of time anyway." It was hilarious, by the way, that you reached for the "studies show that they have little effect" line of attack. Who'd have expected that one, eh?

The irony is that whilst you bleat on about the level of debate, you yourself are becoming less and less credible on this thread.
Click to expand...

lollol ;)
 
Clint Planet said:
What an arrogant and patronising comment to make. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking your "logic" has been rather lacking at times.

You maintain a pretense of being above party politics and point scoring and adopt a 'yearning' for intelligent debate and yet on the last two pages alone you've offered a rsther dismissive "I'm sure" and [on the subject of televised debate] "These things are generally a waste of time anyway." It was hilarious, by the way, that you reached for the "studies show that they have little effect" line of attack. Who'd have expected that one, eh?

The irony is that whilst you bleat on about the level of debate, you yourself are becoming less and less credible on this thread.
Click to expand...

I know, quoting people that have actually studied stuff rather than random newspaper articles is not the way to go. I'll try and stick to the hyperbole in future. The world is over, we're all doomed. Is that better? No one here is going to change their mind on anything, just as no one does after televised debates (reference here, I'm sure as a teacher you appreciate this http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/T/bo13948250.html), so is it really worth getting in a tiz about?
 
Clint Planet said:
What an arrogant and patronising comment to make. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking your "logic" has been rather lacking at times.

You maintain a pretense of being above party politics and point scoring and adopt a 'yearning' for intelligent debate and yet on the last two pages alone you've offered a rsther dismissive "I'm sure" and [on the subject of televised debate] "These things are generally a waste of time anyway." It was hilarious, by the way, that you reached for the "studies show that they have little effect" line of attack. Who'd have expected that one, eh?

The irony is that whilst you bleat on about the level of debate, you yourself are becoming less and less credible on this thread.
Click to expand...

During the Scottish referendum campaign there were plenty of people said, 'I listened to such and such and have now changed my mind'. Sorry this can't be sourced, from an academic journal or 'reputed' academic, (or someone that knows about supermarket warehouses), the only authoritative sources to use, but was from watching TV and talking to people in Coatbridge. I wonder if damaged tellies are a sign that TV debates have an 'effect' on people? Ah but, that never appears in Paul's Proper Real Science Journal so can't have happened.

Observing the world around one (I just love using that word, makes one sound so Sloan Square), and engaging in it with people, is a very powerful way to gain an understanding of the world and how people are getting on in their lives. Equally, listening to people when they talk about what politicians are saying and doing, highlights what effects their policies are having. It is not surprising that Brand is getting an audience. The general feeling I get from people is that 'all politicians' are crap, out to line their own pockets and do in those that work for a living. Sorry I can't source this from a 'reputed' academic journal. But they never asked Ms. Jones, about how she feels about foodbanks, the bedroom tax or the home her mother is in, that is closing down. Sometimes, peoples raw anger just screams out. I used to find that a lot when I taught. Parents would not feel any compulsion to hold back with their views about politicians.

Those that sit in their lofty towers often miss what is going on in the real world. And can certainly never fathom why people don't bow down to their 'superior' intellect.

I would always give an A*, or sticker, when a student would come out with the gem, 'I'm quoting people that have studied stuff'. Oh dear. 'Try explaining it in your own words' I would tactfully say. 'But, Jeff Fridge said this and that'. 'Yes, but what does it mean, try explaining, rather than rely on the words of others'. 'But he has studied monkeys behaviour, so must know about the NHS'.

Always did love the way some people would use the 'quoting people than have studied stuff' as if it was supposed to be the grand finale of all wisdom. A show stopper. A slam dunk. But it generally shows a lack of understanding of the subject being discussed.

Now I wonder where that 'studied stuff' is on TTIP and how it will effect the NHS.

Clint try not to let some people get to you. From an arrogant and patronising person that just loves random newspaper articles..
 
Last edited:

Bruce Wayne said:
I know, quoting people that have actually studied stuff rather than random newspaper articles is not the way to go. I'll try and stick to the hyperbole in future.
Click to expand...

No, you'll stick to the studies that serve your agenda and ignore the facts that don't. As you always do.


The world is over, we're all doomed. Is that better? No one here is going to change their mind on anything......
Click to expand...

What are you doing on this thread, then?

....just as no one does after televised debates
Click to expand...

You have a short memory. Less than 5 years ago Clegg put himself right in the frame with his debate performances.

so is it really worth getting in a tiz about?
Click to expand...

Don't try to patronise me, mate. It doesn't work.
 
Last edited:
awk-moment.gif
 
Clint Planet said:
No, you'll stick to the studies that serve your agenda and ignore the facts that don't. As you always do.
Click to expand...

Tbf, there's quite a lot on here who do exactly the same. People can be beaten to death with facts but then still say "well I think I'm right". Just because Bruce doesn't agree with you doesn't mean he's wrong, it's just what he believes, in the same way that you believe what you want to believe. We all marshal facts to 'prove' our points and beliefs, but who's right, god only knows, certainly not the weak chinned politicians of today who are only in it for themselves......politics and religion eh..........
 

Wonder of Obama's not so discreet backing of Cameron will turn out the same ways as all the candidates he backed in the recent American elections....
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top