(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 16:28, Reply)
All the media training in the world cannot help someone who can't explain how a fairly simple policy will work or be funded. It's not rocket surgery.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 16:48, Reply)
Where the answer sounds convincing but the reality is the policy fails to meet its goals and comes in vastly over budget?
Not that I'm defending her, the interview was embarassing and I had to switch off (plus I'd finished my poo)
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 16:58, Reply)
and quite frankly shuddered. Seriously, we give Ukip a hard time because people perceive them as dangerous radicals, and not this lot as well? Our economy will be completely and utterly fucked under the Green Party, which worries me equally as the mood of the nation under a Ukip governemnt
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:16, Reply)
but having to consider the environmental perspective of any new policies is a good thing, and a hint of green in a coalition would help
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:23, Reply)
she clearly had no idea whatsoever. At least with Labour and Tories they know their bullshit and at least can construct an argument. You may not agree with them or believe them, but there is at least some semblance of coherence and/or plausibility. This silly sausage is asked "how's it going to work love?" and replies "I'm not sure, I've got a cold, I'll get back you on that sometime, maybe." This was the leader of the party, on the day they've blocked booked the media to officially launch their election campaign, talking about a headline key policy. Hope this helps, chum.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:16, Reply)
that she should be a slicker leader or stop the bus and get off, but being a skilled bullshitter should equally not be an acceptable stance for a leader.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:21, Reply)
don't misuse reflexive personal pronouns. You can call it bullshit if you like, I have no problems with that at all, but in politics plausibility and credibility are everything. If you devise a policy, you need to be able to explain how it will work and be paid for. Nice ideas aren't worth the empty box of lentils they were written down on.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:34, Reply)
You are Russell Brand AICMFP
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:46, Reply)
and NigelFarage and GeorgeGalloway and CharlieHebdo and PaulDacre etc etc
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:56, Reply)
If you accept politicians statements at face value. And if you do you're an idiot.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 20:42, Reply)
Might be true, but where does it get you Russell Brand? Now go and finish your homework.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 21:07, Reply)
is not the same as "they're all cunts"
But I'm not surprised you see no difference
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 21:22, Reply)
no need to get your knickers in a twist. Now be a darling and go and put the kettle on; men are talking.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 21:42, Reply)
you need to have a penis to class yourself as one of those
cupcake
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 21:47, Reply)
if you can reach from there
anyway, can we continue this tomorrow, I have a busy day of
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:24, Reply)
I don't have much confidence they would have the ability to implement many of them, and the interview doesn't help with that.
That said, I don't think many people vote for them expecting them to win.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:14, Reply)
but a lot of it simply fucks me off completely. Lunatic things you would expect to be there on hard lefties list of loonie things like the promotion of vegetarian food, cuts to defence, unbanning membership of banned Islamic groups, spending our salaries for us through taxation, and generally lots of other things which remind me of all the worst bits of the hard left labour party in the 80s.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 17:31, Reply)
defence cuts and promotion of vegetarian food?
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 20:48, Reply)
both are demented loonie left ideas, I thought I made that quite clear.
'Promoting' vegetarian food for a government means spending lots of tax payers money on that promotion which i'll be fucked if i'm voting for. Meat has been a stable of our diet for tens of thousands of years, is tasty, healthy, and will be become more expensive as a consequence of making vegetarian food cheaper. There is a big difference between junk food and good food, just because we live in a nation where so many have diets that are utter shite, you can't put that one eating meats door. Promoting healthy diets, not discriminate against part of it because you have an over sentimental view of herbivores that have evolved to be grazed upon.
Sort of thing
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 21:53, Reply)
And people are entitled to disagree with defence cuts.
Lumping the two issues together?
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:02, Reply)
and lumped together. Many people would agree with one and not the other for wildly different reasons
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:18, Reply)
but I sense because you're pushing the issue anything I type will be lost on you, and it's late, and I want to chill as I have an early start tomorrow, and have a cold
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:34, Reply)
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:59, Reply)
so I can see why a green group would want to encourage it for reasons other than just not killing animals.
Stuff like this:
www.livescience.com/22814-meat-eating-vegetarianism.html
(NB I have no idea how trustworthy that blog is, and global population would seem the real problem there)
Likewise, most people eat too much meat - a truly healthy diet would see a reduction for most people.
That said, as far as I can tell, their only policy related to vegetarianism states "The Green Party will ensure that high quality, nutritionally balanced vegetarian and vegan menu options are widely available and promoted in all public sector establishments such as schools, hospitals and care facilities", so their concern seems only for existing vegetarians rather than spending money on promotion.
It still seems an expensive promise, but it is one more concerned with healthy diets than promoting vegetarianism.
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:18, Reply)
And if that's used as an argument what's going to happen when growing crops can't feed everyone, which will inevitably happen? The crunch is human population
(, Tue 24 Feb 2015, 22:32, Reply)
On a serious note, you really cannot compare nutritional value of meat/meatless diet/their nutrition density thus the whole "equivalent/environmental impact" argument is moot.
(, Wed 25 Feb 2015, 16:06, Reply)