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.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ory-welfare-myths-shows-new-poll-8437872.html

Ministers were accused of demonising benefits claimants in an attempt to justify their controversial decision to increase most state handouts by less than inflation.

Polling commissioned by the Trades Union Congress suggests that a campaign by Tory ministers is turning voters against claimants – but only because the public is being fed "myths" about those who rely on benefits.


04-votersprejudice2.jpg

Interesting that. My conclusions would be that;

1. A lot of people are really quite stupid.

2. Too many people read rubbish in certain papers.

3. Any politician convincing 48% to agree with them, actually hasnt.
 
Interesting that. My conclusions would be that;

1. A lot of people are really quite stupid.

2. Too many people read rubbish in certain papers.

3. Any politician convincing 48% to agree with them, actually hasnt.

I think it's a bit more sinister than that. The public are bombarded with "They're all living it up on our hard earned dosh!" propaganda on a daily basis, whether it's via rubbishy papers, the mainstream news media (who happily give it publicity without actually challenging it that much) or even mass entertainment shows like C4's Benefits Street.

If you tell someone black is blue enough times, they'll begin to believe you. It's not fair to criticise them for doing so. And it's not right to let the brainwashers off scott-free.
 
I think it's a bit more sinister than that. The public are bombarded with "They're all living it up on our hard earned dosh!" propaganda on a daily basis, whether it's via rubbishy papers, the mainstream news media (who happily give it publicity without actually challenging it that much) or even mass entertainment shows like C4's Benefits Street.

If you tell someone black is blue enough times, they'll begin to believe you. It's not fair to criticise them for doing so. And it's not right to let the brainwashers off scott-free.

Yep, I agree. The benefits system is far from perfect, but to demonise those who need it is poor form. And those Benefit programmes do my nut. Not because every person on them is some deserving person who is going through a rough patch, but because they take pretty extreme examples, and then idiots decide that is the norm. Ridiculous.

The system is as it is. It will take a generation to fix cos its taken a generation to evolve.

And that is from a parent who has benefited from the "welfare" budget massively with my youngest lad. Being an UG, you might recall that from last year.
 
I hate hearing this. It's a lazy trope trotted out by both sides. Much of the time, it means "they're easier to exploit", I agree.

The hairdresser's remark doesn't hold water. A "British" (by which I assume you mean white, as there are British people of many ethnic origins) worker may have those skills, and if they haven't, they wouldn't get the job. There's no reason there to discriminate on grounds of race or nationality.

I haven't called Farage a racist here, I just think his comments are ridiculous and what he suggests unworkable. It's easy to say racism and discrimination don't exist anymore when you're in a position where you'll never really have experienced either.

To be fair to the man, I know of nobody else who gets called a Nazi/Hitler more than an actual Nazi/Hitler. He's probably discriminated against more than anyone right now. Whether people think his policies are extreme or not, they're certainly aren't "kill 10 million people" extreme.
 
To be fair to the man, I know of nobody else who gets called a Nazi/Hitler more than an actual Nazi/Hitler. He's probably discriminated against more than anyone right now. Whether people think his policies are extreme or not, they're certainly aren't "kill 10 million people" extreme.

Not sure who calls him Hitler, but he's certainly far-right, and I suspect we do not know the true extremities of his beliefs yet.

To say he's the most discriminated person you know of is quite ridiculous. The man thrives if negative press. He creates it. He laps it up, and he's never off the tele. You know what they say; there's in such thing as bad publicity.
 
There was an event recently with the education ministers of each of the three main parties present. Interesting to hear their thoughts.

https://www.thersa.org/discover/pub...2015/03/giving-educators-the-space-to-create/

"
The imposing words of Matthew 1:23 (Emmanuel; God is with us.) seemed out of place as they loomed over the podium at this week’s TES education hustings. If anything was clear, it was that Nicky Morgan, Tristram Hunt and David Laws have no intention of being educational messiahs.

Although each party had a different methodology, they all seemed to be calling for decentralisation and wanted teachers, head teachers and schools to be in charge. Nicky Morgan advocated a "bedding in" to allow teachers and schools to turn the reforms of the last five years into a system that grew organically, school-to-school and improved itself. David Laws, in a similar vein, called for greater trust to be placed in schools, pointing to pupil premium (which he rather morbidly asked to be emblazoned on his tombstone) as an example of how schools can make the right choices for their locality. Tristram Hunt came closest to announcing new policy when he asked for teachers to be given the professional autonomy to develop a 'Licence to Create' (he got a big round of applause from this RSA staffer for that one) and spoke of devolving the power to create new schools back to the local level.

As each member of the panel spoke, the room (mainly teachers) seemed to breathe a collective sigh of relief that no one was talking about an educational utopian future. There was an appetite for improvement, but not for change. Questions were generally focused on how to build on what we already have. How do you recruit and retain talented teachers? How do we build on pupil premium to support the most disadvantaged? How can we continue to develop Early Years provision? The atmosphere was more thoughtful than revolutionary and demonstrated the need for the RSA's Director of Education, Joe Hallgarten’s, 'year of reflection’ where he calls for the academic year following the election to be one when:

  • No schools-related policies are announced by DfE or any other national or local agency;

  • No schools are forced or permitted to become academies

  • No Ofsted inspections take place apart from re-inspections of those schools which have been judged inadequate, and inspections of new free schools and academies

  • No organisations (and yes, that means the RSA too) should publish any new policy proposals for schools. The phrases ‘DfE should’ or ‘schools should’ would disappear for a year.
Which would allow schools to continue “improving teaching, and responding to changes that already require implementation, temporarily free from the fear of the Wednesday afternoon Ofsted phone call.”

My own experience working as a teacher to set up a free school in East London showed me how important a process of informed reflection can be. When you are trying to create, innovate and trying something new, what you need is trust, not oversight and paperwork. Educators need a chance to look at the data they have been collecting and use it to plan great lessons; not prove why they deserve their pay rise. They need the time to look honestly at their own lessons and improve on their weaknesses; not learn how to hide them from an inspector. They need the space to promote a love of learning in their students; not worry about their next unannounced observation.It would have been easy to walk away from the TES hustings feeling that nothing new had been said; that nothing new will be done, but in doing so, you would miss out on the opportunity to place yourself at the heart of sustainable local change. In his closing remarks Tristram Hunt reminded the audience that “creativity is in our DNA.” It was clear that all the parties wanted the power to create a socially positive, and outstanding education system in the hands of educators themselves. The question now is, if given this new freedom, how will they use it?"
 
RSA's Director of Education, Joe Hallgarten’s, 'year of reflection’ [called] for the academic year following the election to be one when:

  • No schools-related policies are announced by DfE or any other national or local agency;

  • No schools are forced or permitted to become academies

  • No Ofsted inspections take place apart from re-inspections of those schools which have been judged inadequate, and inspections of new free schools and academies

  • No organisations (and yes, that means the RSA too) should publish any new policy proposals for schools. The phrases ‘DfE should’ or ‘schools should’ would disappear for a year.
Which would allow schools to continue “improving teaching, and responding to changes that already require implementation, temporarily free from the fear of the Wednesday afternoon Ofsted phone call.”

My own experience working as a teacher to set up a free school in East London showed me how important a process of informed reflection can be. When you are trying to create, innovate and trying something new, what you need is trust, not oversight and paperwork. Educators need a chance to look at the data they have been collecting and use it to plan great lessons; not prove why they deserve their pay rise. They need the time to look honestly at their own lessons and improve on their weaknesses; not learn how to hide them from an inspector. They need the space to promote a love of learning in their students; not worry about their next unannounced observation.

Sadly, I just can't see that happening.
 
Taking policies aside for one moment and just going on the leaders i am finding it more difficult everyday to see myself voting for Labour. I have done all my life but having Ed Miliband in charger of the country just makes me cringe. He just seems so wet to me and the thought of him in discussions with Putin/Merkel and Obama etc...*shudders*

This will be one of the biggest issues facing Labour even more so than any policies they may want to pass. Miliband just does not fill me with any great hope and i would say a decent amount of voters will go on the 'bloke' in charge more than the parties actual values.
 
Taking policies aside for one moment and just going on the leaders i am finding it more difficult everyday to see myself voting for Labour. I have done all my life but having Ed Miliband in charger of the country just makes me cringe. He just seems so wet to me and the thought of him in discussions with Putin/Merkel and Obama etc...*shudders*

This will be one of the biggest issues facing Labour even more so than any policies they may want to pass. Miliband just does not fill me with any great hope and i would say a decent amount of voters will go on the 'bloke' in charge more than the parties actual values.

Bet Putin doesn't have two kitchens in his house though
 
Taking policies aside for one moment and just going on the leaders i am finding it more difficult everyday to see myself voting for Labour. I have done all my life but having Ed Miliband in charger of the country just makes me cringe. He just seems so wet to me and the thought of him in discussions with Putin/Merkel and Obama etc...*shudders*

What will mostly affect the country, ultimately, will be policies not personalities. Look how many people are forced to use food banks - in a developed country in 2015 ,ffs, whilst the top 10% are all much better off than in 2007. It's offensive. Look at how the most vulnerable are under attack for being scroungers whilst those in Westminster milk the system shamelessly. Look at the displacement of our most vulnerable children as a result of benefit capping. Look at the ideological warfare waged on schools and teachers by people who know F all about it (really, Gove was so deplorably bad for our schools). Look at TTIP and what it holds in store for the UK - American multinationals crushing local business in pursuit of profit for its own sake with scant consideration for community.

I'm not mad about Red Ed - who is? - but I liked his political views more than his Brother's during the leadership election and remember - Call Me Dave seemed a hopelessly out of touch toff a few years ago. Many would say he still is, of course, but it's funny how positions of power can add gravitas to the most underwhelming of people.

Policy, mate. Let's get this horrible lot out.
 
There was an event recently with the education ministers of each of the three main parties present. Interesting to hear their thoughts.

https://www.thersa.org/discover/pub...2015/03/giving-educators-the-space-to-create/

"
The imposing words of Matthew 1:23 (Emmanuel; God is with us.) seemed out of place as they loomed over the podium at this week’s TES education hustings. If anything was clear, it was that Nicky Morgan, Tristram Hunt and David Laws have no intention of being educational messiahs.

Although each party had a different methodology, they all seemed to be calling for decentralisation and wanted teachers, head teachers and schools to be in charge. Nicky Morgan advocated a "bedding in" to allow teachers and schools to turn the reforms of the last five years into a system that grew organically, school-to-school and improved itself. David Laws, in a similar vein, called for greater trust to be placed in schools, pointing to pupil premium (which he rather morbidly asked to be emblazoned on his tombstone) as an example of how schools can make the right choices for their locality. Tristram Hunt came closest to announcing new policy when he asked for teachers to be given the professional autonomy to develop a 'Licence to Create' (he got a big round of applause from this RSA staffer for that one) and spoke of devolving the power to create new schools back to the local level.

As each member of the panel spoke, the room (mainly teachers) seemed to breathe a collective sigh of relief that no one was talking about an educational utopian future. There was an appetite for improvement, but not for change. Questions were generally focused on how to build on what we already have. How do you recruit and retain talented teachers? How do we build on pupil premium to support the most disadvantaged? How can we continue to develop Early Years provision? The atmosphere was more thoughtful than revolutionary and demonstrated the need for the RSA's Director of Education, Joe Hallgarten’s, 'year of reflection’ where he calls for the academic year following the election to be one when:

  • No schools-related policies are announced by DfE or any other national or local agency;

  • No schools are forced or permitted to become academies

  • No Ofsted inspections take place apart from re-inspections of those schools which have been judged inadequate, and inspections of new free schools and academies

  • No organisations (and yes, that means the RSA too) should publish any new policy proposals for schools. The phrases ‘DfE should’ or ‘schools should’ would disappear for a year.
Which would allow schools to continue “improving teaching, and responding to changes that already require implementation, temporarily free from the fear of the Wednesday afternoon Ofsted phone call.”

My own experience working as a teacher to set up a free school in East London showed me how important a process of informed reflection can be. When you are trying to create, innovate and trying something new, what you need is trust, not oversight and paperwork. Educators need a chance to look at the data they have been collecting and use it to plan great lessons; not prove why they deserve their pay rise. They need the time to look honestly at their own lessons and improve on their weaknesses; not learn how to hide them from an inspector. They need the space to promote a love of learning in their students; not worry about their next unannounced observation.It would have been easy to walk away from the TES hustings feeling that nothing new had been said; that nothing new will be done, but in doing so, you would miss out on the opportunity to place yourself at the heart of sustainable local change. In his closing remarks Tristram Hunt reminded the audience that “creativity is in our DNA.” It was clear that all the parties wanted the power to create a socially positive, and outstanding education system in the hands of educators themselves. The question now is, if given this new freedom, how will they use it?"

That is an example of the tacit purpose of politicians to shift responsibility for direction and actual policy away from themselves, they want ready scapegoats.
 
Taking policies aside for one moment and just going on the leaders i am finding it more difficult everyday to see myself voting for Labour. I have done all my life but having Ed Miliband in charger of the country just makes me cringe. He just seems so wet to me and the thought of him in discussions with Putin/Merkel and Obama etc...*shudders*

This will be one of the biggest issues facing Labour even more so than any policies they may want to pass. Miliband just does not fill me with any great hope and i would say a decent amount of voters will go on the 'bloke' in charge more than the parties actual values.

He will fail, fall and I would bet it is between Chucky Umuna or Burnham to replace him
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top