Suppose we take a look at current UK Political Polls - Westminster Voting Intention taken from here.
The competence of over half of the parties should be known to any voter who pays attention to these things - that is to say, Labour, Conservative Lib Dems and SNP. Yet on past performance we might plausibly suggest that all of these parties are known to be incompetent.
There are lots of caveats here, but add in Greens who base their appeal on an incompetent ideology and we might go on to suggest that about two thirds of voters seem to be politically incompetent.
There are lots of caveats here, but add in Greens who base their appeal on an incompetent ideology and we might go on to suggest that about two thirds of voters seem to be politically incompetent.
This is not a suggestion that voters should support Reform, more a case of noting that far too many voters give their vote to parties with a history of political incompetence.
7 comments:
Although in fairness to the voters the paucity of choice previously was to vote for (perhaps) the least incompetent party. A choice so limited that voting by tradition was as sensible as any other means.
This suited the established parties (who didn't need to prove competence) and raised high bars against new parties.
But once the media started to exploit the parties for newsworthy articles the 'steady as she goes' political stance has shown daily evidence of incompetence (whether true or not). The new parties are in with a chance...
The paucity of the competent to elect is major. Anyone halfway competent then needs to show corruptibility before preselection.
DJ - the major parties seem to focus on encouraging voters to vote against the other lot, which worked for what was effectively a two party contest. This also steers the focus away from their own competence. Starmer is doing much the same, trying to attack Reform as an alternative to being less useless.
Yes the new parties are in with a chance, but unfortunately this includes the Greens.
James - yes, the wrong people seem to enter national politics with no real check on their competence or experience. Political machines seem to know that voters vote for the party brand and rhetoric and chutzpah beat competence.
Apart from Labour's policies of letting everyone into the country, and live off the taxpayer, in the name of DEI, or paying other countries to take British territories, does anyone know what each party's policies are, how they are going to apply it, and how much it will cost? All they seem to do is point out the mistakes made by 'the others', without any detailed clarification of how they are going to fix them. The worst, I think, is Reform. What are their policies on the economy, law and order, benefit abuse, the NHS, or social services, for a start? No one seems to know. With Muslim senior Reform members, I would suggest any plans on slowing down, or stopping, the islamisation of Britain, could be a problem for Farage.
Protest votes seem to be the way forward, even with the dangers that that may entail, that is, if we are ever allowed to have elections again.
Penseivat
Penseivat - I agree, it's a problem with voting for Reform, what are they actually going to do? Not much seems to be a reasonable conclusion and it's not a cynical conclusion as Farage seems to be well aware that protest is his main appeal.
Is Reform interested in the hard slog of genuine reform? Possibly not if it isn't politically essential for winning the next general election.
We also have the problem of voting for a political party that declares its policy intentions prior to a general election, only to abrubtly change or reverse to the opposite position when gaining office. The voter then wonders what the point of voting was.
Tammly - any party doing that deserves to sink without trace but as we know, they don't. Voters are far too loyal.
Post a Comment