Machiavelli
Well-known member
You're correct, but they're not marginalised ...I think technically men are a minority, 48% of the population IIRC
... which I'm sure will prove a popular view on a site largely frequented by men
You're correct, but they're not marginalised ...I think technically men are a minority, 48% of the population IIRC
We’re being marginalised by women who refuse to join, I think you’ll findYou're correct, but they're not marginalised ...
... which I'm sure will prove a popular view on a site largely frequented by men
I find it intriguing that the Lib Dems still get so much flak over tuition fees. Their manifesto for the 2010 election did include a pledge to abolish tuition fees but they became the junior partner in a coalition and weren't in a position to dictate terms.
Fair enough, you could argue they could have refused to join a coalition over this point but it wasn't really a U-turn, they just didn't convince the Tories. It was, after all, a difficult sell given the need to cut a massive public defecit at the time.
I agree this has haunted them for the last 15 years and that they played their hand badly but in the list of politically infamous acts I'm still surprised this features so highly given all the other examples I could think of. After all, Labour introduced tuition fees in the first place and the Tories insisted on keeping them and then raising them.From memory, they’d made it one of their key pledges, and it was something that got a lot of voters voting for them, wanting others to have the same opportunities that they’d enjoyed.
Education used to be considered a key feature of a civilized nation, rather than a money-making racket for spivs, sorry, experienced executives with a wide range of experience in other industries.
For the Lib Dems to then willingly enter an electoral pact that saw them abandon their stance on tuition fees destroyed them for a generation. It was considered a cast iron betrayal by their core vote.
I agree this has haunted them for the last 15 years and that they played their hand badly but in the list of politically infamous acts I'm still surprised this features so highly given all the other examples I could think of. After all, Labour introduced tuition fees in the first place and the Tories insisted on keeping them and then raising them.
But sadly very few politiciansIt's a platitude. It's pretty much what every contestant in a Miss World contest would spout as one of her ambitions back in the day.
And we're nice guys guys, why won't they join?We’re being marginalised by women who refuse to join, I think you’ll find
Tough choice for them really.From memory, they’d made it one of their key pledges, and it was something that got a lot of voters voting for them, wanting others to have the same opportunities that they’d enjoyed.
Education used to be considered a key feature of a civilized nation, rather than a money-making racket for spivs, sorry, experienced executives with a wide range of experience in other industries.
For the Lib Dems to then willingly enter an electoral pact that saw them abandon their stance on tuition fees destroyed them for a generation. It was considered a cast iron betrayal by their core vote.
I still can’t look past David Bellotti being a Lib-Dem councillor. That will forever tarnish the party for me.
I got a post blocked on FB due to 'hate speech' for saying that men are useless for not being psychic!!! Just because a woman said she didn't want anything from the shop, doesn't mean that a man can come back from the shop with chocolate for just himself! I didn't get arrested and thrown in jail though (sorry).Lots of new support proposed for minority groups, but not men. Are we invisible? Why should misogyny be a hate crime, but not misandry?
Why persist with the triple-lock? The wealthy pensioners aren't the ones in desperate need of help right now in our society
Why should 16-17 year olds be able to vote? They're literally children with no adult life experience.
Remove the benefits cap for the two child limit? Great, the people who we don't want to have more children have more, while the people we want to have children still have none.
...and no thanks, rejoining the EU would be an absolute disaster.
...and so on. LABOUR for the WORKING British people that keep this society running.
I think the assumption is that 16-17 year olds don't have the life experience. But with Reform getting all the votes they got in the council elections, we might as well extend the franchise to anyone who can put a x on a piece of paper. It'll make little difference where a person's ability to rationalise is concerned.I got a post blocked on FB due to 'hate speech' for saying that men are useless for not being psychic!!! Just because a woman said she didn't want anything from the shop, doesn't mean that a man can come back from the shop with chocolate for just himself! I didn't get arrested and thrown in jail though (sorry).
Why shouldn't 16-17 year olds be allowed to vote? They're allowed to procreate, so they could be voting for their kids future. They also pay tax so why shouldn't they have a say on who decides where it's spent?
The rest of your post (without wanting to be offensive) is just waffle. That's saying a lot from someone with my posting history!
Good grief man - this is no time for optimism ! What on earth are you thinking of ?I just think that in those days the country still believed it could have nice things, and the average LD voter was a fairly idealistic sort.
I actually really miss feelings like optimism myself.
What’s the process for doing this? Does it need a 2/3rds majority or anything like that? Although even if it did, idLet's not forget that a lower voting age was in Labour's 2024 manifesto. So it's a change I'm expecting to happen
"Labour's manifesto pledge to reduce the voting age from 18 to 16 in UK general elections"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cnd09l31rrjo.amp
I'm assuming it'd be the usual route a bill would have to go through the house of commons and house of lords on a majority voting basisWhat’s the process for doing this? Does it need a 2/3rds majority or anything like that? Although even if it did, id
Well yes, and there's absolutely loads from their manifesto they did get throughI find it intriguing that the Lib Dems still get so much flak over tuition fees. Their manifesto for the 2010 election did include a pledge to abolish tuition fees but they became the junior partner in a coalition and weren't in a position to dictate terms.
Fair enough, you could argue they could have refused to join a coalition over this point but it wasn't really a U-turn, they just didn't convince the Tories. It was, after all, a difficult sell given the need to cut a massive public defecit at the time.