What can we do to change the minds of decision makers and people in general to actually do something about preparing for the forthcoming economic/energy crises (the ones after this one!)?
clv101 wrote:Indeed, it seems crystal clear to me that very few politicians actually make any attempt to speak their minds clearly. It just makes them sound ridiculous. Pretty sad situation really.
I speak my mind on this forum and the response from a small number of posters (not you) is personal abuse.
Did you watch the clip? Do you understand why most people react to that with total exasperation, and just end up hating politics? There is absolutely no reason why the three "mainstream" candidates could not simply have answered the question, and their failure to do so is just an insult to the intelligence of the audience. It wouldn't matter if this just happened now and then, but it doesn't. Rather, it is the standard mode of communication of most politicians, most of the time. It is the result of them living in some sort of bubble, surrounded by other politicians, rather than in the real world where normal people live. They actually think they can get away with this without most of the listeners responding by hating them.
Corbyn deserves to be winning. The other three are pointless human beings who might as well not exist.
Jeremy Corbyn draws fire for position on Britain's EU future
The Labour leadership candidate has stated several times the EU is imperfect and needs reform, drawing criticism from rivals who demand clarity.
Eh? What's not clear about this:
"Asked on Saturday by the Observer to clarify his position on the EU, Corbyn had suggested his preferred position was for the UK to remain inside a reformed community.
"Labour should set out its own clear position to influence negotiations, working with our European allies to set out a reform agenda to benefit
ordinary Europeans across the continent," he said. "We cannot be content with the state of the EU as it stands. But that does not mean walking
away, but staying to fight together for a better Europe."
UndercoverElephant wrote:See? That is how to give a straight answer to a straight question.
I note that you didn't manage it though.
What question did I not answer.
This one:
Did you watch the clip? Do you understand why most people react to that with total exasperation, and just end up hating politics?
There is absolutely no reason why the three "mainstream" candidates could not simply have answered the question, and their failure to do so is just an insult to the intelligence of the audience. It wouldn't matter if this just happened now and then, but it doesn't. Rather, it is the standard mode of communication of most politicians, most of the time. It is the result of them living in some sort of bubble, surrounded by other politicians, rather than in the real world where normal people live. They actually think they can get away with this without most of the listeners responding by hating them.
You, a politician, responded to this by not answering the question.
At the hustings in Warrington, Mr Corbyn, Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and Liz Kendall were asked directly if they would 'rule out voting No or campaigning for No' ahead of the 2017 referendum.
The Islington North MP replied: "No I wouldn't rule it out...Because Cameron quite clearly follows an agenda which is about trading away workers' rights, is about trading away environmental protection, is about trading away much of what is in the social chapter.
"The EU also knowingly, deliberately maintains a number of tax havens and tax evasion posts around the continent - Luxembourg, Monaco and a number of others - and has this strange relationship with Switzerland which allows a lot of European companies to outsource their profits to Switzerland where tax rates are very low.
"I think we should be making demands: universal workers' rights, universal environmental protection, end the race to the bottom on corporate taxation, end the race to the bottom in working wage protection.
"And I think we should be making those demands and negotiating on those demands rather than saying blanketly we're going to support whatever Cameron comes out with in one, two years' time, whenever he finally decides to hold this referendum.
So he has made clear what he wants to change about membership of the EU and if Cameron fails to negotiate on these points, he would campaign for NO. Whatever you think of his position, one thing it doesn't lack is clarity.
