I don't get it... I really don't. Tactical voting. I mean, apart from the fact that it's not really in the spirit of democracy, it doesn't make sense does it?
When you look at it, tactical voting is this - someone not voting for the political party whose policies most closely match those that they believe in, but instead voting for a political party they don't believe have the right policies in order to try to prevent another political party whose policies they also don't believe are right getting into power.
So their vote increases the likelihood of them not getting what they want.
Seems strange to me.
Imagine if this was food....
What's on the menu... Oh, I definitely don't want steak... Oh - a vegan option - that's what I really want... ah, but it's quite obscure - they might not have any left. OK, well I'll have the fish just to make sure I don't get steak.... I'll not bother asking for what I really want.
Funny how the vegan option is missing next time you go to the same place!
Stupid thing is that there are even web sites telling you who to vote for 'tactically'. Of course those running the site haven't got an agenda of their own - they're only doing it to help you... yeah.
I have no idea yet who I'm voting for next month. What I do know is that I'll be voting for what I believe in, not what some web site tells me is best tactically!
Sunday, 10 November 2019
Sunday, 20 October 2019
Should I Stay or Should I Go?
Hmmm... Brexit.... what a shambles.
Just a thought though -
We really need a 'peoples vote' to clear this up don't we???
Just a thought though -
- EU Referendum - Leave Wins.
- Snap General Election - Parties that stood on leaving EU get majority over those standing on stay.
- Local Elections - Parties that stood on leaving EU get majority over those standing on stay.
- European Elections - Parties that stood on leaving EU get huge majority (bizarrely MEP candidates were standing on a ticket to effectively sack themselves and still won).
We really need a 'peoples vote' to clear this up don't we???
Monday, 22 April 2019
Inform, Educate, Entertain.... with Impartiality???
Words fail me. They really do.
In the UK we have an enforced license fee which we must pay to the BBC. In return we supposedly get 'free' television from a company who is supposed to remain impartial.
But does impartiality mean ignoring major events? Surely by failing to report on something major they are failing to be impartial by omission.
Many people in the UK will have the full story of how many Easter eggs have been bought, who makes the best hot cross buns and how many 'eco warriors' glued themselves to the road in London (incidentally, I can't believe such strong glue is in any way environmentally friendly but there's irony for you).
Those same people will unfortunately be blissfully unaware of the many thousand veterans of the armed forces along with many serving members who have protested recently.
On the 12th April, 22,000 motorcyclists rode through central London #rollingthunder - imagine for a second the sight and sound of 22,000 motorbikes. You'd have thought that would be newsworthy wouldn't you?
On the 19th April there were large marches in many city centres - London where there were over 12,000 marchers, Manchester, over 7000 and thousands more in other cities. In each location a sea of regimental colours, men in berets marching together - it could hardly be missed #millionveteransmarch. Again - a coordinated set of marches in major cities should certainly be newsworthy shouldn't it??
Well - it seems that there has been a news blackout for these particular protests. Not just by the BBC, but by every other mainstream broadcasters and most of the minor ones too.
Now I hate conspiracy theories, but could this be the government gagging the broadcasters? Is this too much of a sensitive issue for there to be an open and balanced conversation and for the public to know about it? Shouldn't a truly independent and impartial organisation disregard any government directive if the story is in the public interest?
What are the protest marches all about you may wonder? Well the date of the last protest should give you a clue. Good Friday. The Good Friday agreement was drawn up to bring about peace in Northern Ireland. As part of the agreement 400 convicted terrorists were released and a further 200 suspected terrorists were given 'get out of jail free cards' - letters guaranteeing that they would not be prosecuted for past terrorist crimes.
You may have seen recently stories of 'Soldier F' and 'Soldier B' who are to be prosecuted for past events in Northern Ireland.
The protests are about the injustice of this situation. They (or as a veteran myself I should say we) are protesting at the double standards and witch hunting of men and women who took an oath to protect this country, and who in many conflicts before and after Ireland have done just that - whatever the personal cost.
The entire military family are not happy.
This is not just about Northern Ireland. It is about every conflict before or since. It is about every action a member of the armed forces takes at any time. Actions which may seem unsavoury or difficult or even savage to those who benefit from the protection and security which comes about from these actions. But how can a member of the armed forces be expected to do these things if they think that 20 or 30 years later they may be facing prosecution for doing their duty?
However, in the marches there was no trouble. No fighting. No environmentally unfriendly glue. What was on display was dignified and disciplined, showing pride and respect. Something to be expected from those who understand what these words mean. Something which those who failed to report these marches clearly do not understand.
In the UK we have an enforced license fee which we must pay to the BBC. In return we supposedly get 'free' television from a company who is supposed to remain impartial.
But does impartiality mean ignoring major events? Surely by failing to report on something major they are failing to be impartial by omission.
Many people in the UK will have the full story of how many Easter eggs have been bought, who makes the best hot cross buns and how many 'eco warriors' glued themselves to the road in London (incidentally, I can't believe such strong glue is in any way environmentally friendly but there's irony for you).
Those same people will unfortunately be blissfully unaware of the many thousand veterans of the armed forces along with many serving members who have protested recently.
On the 12th April, 22,000 motorcyclists rode through central London #rollingthunder - imagine for a second the sight and sound of 22,000 motorbikes. You'd have thought that would be newsworthy wouldn't you?
On the 19th April there were large marches in many city centres - London where there were over 12,000 marchers, Manchester, over 7000 and thousands more in other cities. In each location a sea of regimental colours, men in berets marching together - it could hardly be missed #millionveteransmarch. Again - a coordinated set of marches in major cities should certainly be newsworthy shouldn't it??
Well - it seems that there has been a news blackout for these particular protests. Not just by the BBC, but by every other mainstream broadcasters and most of the minor ones too.
Now I hate conspiracy theories, but could this be the government gagging the broadcasters? Is this too much of a sensitive issue for there to be an open and balanced conversation and for the public to know about it? Shouldn't a truly independent and impartial organisation disregard any government directive if the story is in the public interest?
What are the protest marches all about you may wonder? Well the date of the last protest should give you a clue. Good Friday. The Good Friday agreement was drawn up to bring about peace in Northern Ireland. As part of the agreement 400 convicted terrorists were released and a further 200 suspected terrorists were given 'get out of jail free cards' - letters guaranteeing that they would not be prosecuted for past terrorist crimes.
You may have seen recently stories of 'Soldier F' and 'Soldier B' who are to be prosecuted for past events in Northern Ireland.
The protests are about the injustice of this situation. They (or as a veteran myself I should say we) are protesting at the double standards and witch hunting of men and women who took an oath to protect this country, and who in many conflicts before and after Ireland have done just that - whatever the personal cost.
The entire military family are not happy.
This is not just about Northern Ireland. It is about every conflict before or since. It is about every action a member of the armed forces takes at any time. Actions which may seem unsavoury or difficult or even savage to those who benefit from the protection and security which comes about from these actions. But how can a member of the armed forces be expected to do these things if they think that 20 or 30 years later they may be facing prosecution for doing their duty?
However, in the marches there was no trouble. No fighting. No environmentally unfriendly glue. What was on display was dignified and disciplined, showing pride and respect. Something to be expected from those who understand what these words mean. Something which those who failed to report these marches clearly do not understand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)