ecuk268 Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 What nonsense. Why do you assume that any right wing opinions are "delivered" to people, but your "right on Leftie views" are a result of your highly intelligent mind and formed by principles? There is some factual evidence to this. A recent study by the LSE using raw US data showed that IQ was higher in those with more left-wing or liberal views and fell as you moved to the right. They did the same with religion and found that IQ fell as devoutness (is that a word?) increased.
pap Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 There is some factual evidence to this. A recent study by the LSE using raw US data showed that IQ was higher in those with more left-wing or liberal views and fell as you moved to the right. They did the same with religion and found that IQ fell as devoutness (is that a word?) increased. Not surprised. The very nature of being liberal involves having to juggle substantially more possibilities than "send them all back" or "re-open the workhouses".
dune Posted 6 October, 2011 Author Posted 6 October, 2011 There is some factual evidence to this. A recent study by the LSE using raw US data showed that IQ was higher in those with more left-wing or liberal views and fell as you moved to the right. They did the same with religion and found that IQ fell as devoutness (is that a word?) increased. Labour = ruin the economy, Conservative = fix the economy. Simples.
SuperMikey Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Caught some of David Cameron's speech yesterday, what an arrogant arsehole. Calling the Labour party "self-righteous" and then shouting something about all being in it together and then doing a christlike pose on the podium. Look at him at 8:50, the c*nt! Like he'd just finished conducting the Philharmonic or something... Glad he's been found out though, he's just little style and no substance.
badgerx16 Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 (edited) What nonsense. Who are you to decide how other people arrive at their opinions? Well, the Home Secretary seems to write her conference speeches on the basis of sensationalist, and completely b0ll0x, Daily Mail headlines. And I seem to remember "It's the Sun wot won it" after the 1992 election. Edited 6 October, 2011 by badgerx16
dune Posted 6 October, 2011 Author Posted 6 October, 2011 Caught some of David Cameron's speech yesterday, what an arrogant arsehole. Calling the Labour party "self-righteous" and then shouting something about all being in it together and then doing a christlike pose on the podium. Look at him at 8:50, the c*nt! Like he'd just finished conducting the Philharmonic or something... Glad he's been found out though, he's just little style and no substance. He should get some bracelets.
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Glad he's been found out though, he's just little style and no substance. I just can't take him seriously (not least for that Bullingdon Club photo). http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1542634/Cameron-as-leader-of-the-Slightly-Silly-Party.html (BTW How do you get a piccy up here???) Having come across him in a previous life he is a super smarmy smooth talker (even more so than Blair before him, who at least had a vision), who was great at pulling strings and getting others point across, but as Boris Johnson alluded to yesterday, he isn't the most intellectually gifted or much cop at strategic thinking. His vision of a "Big Society" means nothing and will succumb to nothing. This country is struggling if the best we had to offer was Cameron v Brown last time around and Cameron v Milliband jnr next time!!!! What a dearth of talent.
Thedelldays Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 I just can't take him seriously (not least for that Bullingdon Club photo).http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1542634/Cameron-as-leader-of-the-Slightly-Silly-Party.html(BTW How do you get a piccy up here???)Having come across him in a previous life he is a super smarmy smooth talker (even more so than Blair before him, who at least had a vision), who was great at pulling strings and getting others point across, but as Boris Johnson alluded to yesterday, he isn't the most intellectually gifted or much cop at strategic thinking. His vision of a "Big Society" means nothing and will succumb to nothing.This country is struggling if the best we had to offer was Cameron v Brown last time around and Cameron v Milliband jnr next time!!!! What a dearth of talent.lets be honest, if he has all the substance people would literally go mental and slate him..we are not used to it so the min a politician shows any we tear them apart....
SuperMikey Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 He should get some bracelets. Wristbands ffs. This country is struggling if the best we had to offer was Cameron v Brown last time around and Cameron v Milliband jnr next time!!!! What a dearth of talent. This is why i'm moving to Canada after I graduate. Politically, we're f*cked. Canada might not be much better, but at least they've got natural resources and some sort of future ahead of them.
Turkish Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Wristbands ffs. This is why i'm moving to Canada after I graduate. Politically, we're f*cked. Canada might not be much better, but at least they've got natural resources and some sort of future ahead of them. So you are going to milk the tax payer to pay for your education then f*ck off at the first opportunity, backstabbing the country which educated you on the way. What a selfish individual you are.
Thedelldays Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 (edited) So you are going to milk the tax payer to pay for your education then f*ck off at the first opportunity. What a selfish individual you are. no no...he is a liberal...he is better than us im sure canada will welcome him...with all his experiences to offer etc Edited 6 October, 2011 by Thedelldays
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 lets be honest, if he has all the substance people would literally go mental and slate him..we are not used to it so the min a politician shows any we tear them apart.... Not sure what you're trying to say here (not being rude, just can't work it out, might be my fault).
Thedelldays Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Not sure what you're trying to say here (not being rude, just can't work it out, might be my fault). I think it was quite clear, so yes, it is your fault will say it again people all moan that our politicians have no substance etc..but the moment one does show some he/she will get torn apart for what they stand for....by the press, the public and the reporters.... we have the politicians we pretty much created, bland, down the middle, say what we want to hear
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 (edited) I think it was quite clear, so yes, it is your fault will say it again people all moan that our politicians have no substance etc..but the moment one does show some he/she will get torn apart for what they stand for....by the press, the public and the reporters.... we have the politicians we pretty much created, bland, down the middle, say what we want to hear IMHO a ridiculous assertion. Of course we're used to politicians, of all persuasions, having substance rather than the PR slick edifice of Cameron (and Blair to a lesser extent). Edited 6 October, 2011 by um pahars not stooping as low as the submariner LOL
Turkish Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 IMHO a ridiculous assertion. Of course we're used to politicians, of all persuasions, having substance rather than the PR slick edifice of Cameron (and Blair to a lesser extent). such as??
OVER THE HILL Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Labour = ruin the economy, Conservative = f**k the economy. Simples. I think you meant this.
Turkish Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Margaret Thatcher Different era all together. What current politicians are popular that have a bit if charisma and are not afraid to tell it how it is, rather than pandering to what everyone wants to hear.
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Different era all together. What current politicians are popular that have a bit if charisma and are not afraid to tell it how it is, rather than pandering to what everyone wants to hear. But that's a different proposition than what DD was putting forward. There's a difference between pandering to a thickle [sic] electorate and smarming them and any politician of substance being torn apart just because they have substance behind them.
Thedelldays Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 But that's a different proposition than what DD was putting forward. There's a difference between pandering to a thickle [sic] electorate and smarming them and any politician of substance being torn apart just because they have substance behind them.no it was not....imagine maggie thatcher now christ, there would be meltdown..more so than anything we saw before
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 no it was not....imagine maggie thatcher now christ, there would be meltdown..more so than anything we saw before What the meltdown be about??? Her having substance or the substance itself???
Thedelldays Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 What the meltdown be about??? Her having substance or the substance itself??? her having substance....people wish her dead now. she has not been in power for a very long time
shurlock Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Different era all together. What current politicians are popular that have a bit if charisma and are not afraid to tell it how it is, rather than pandering to what everyone wants to hear. Ken Clark, Vince Cable, David Willetts, John Denham, Paddy Ashdown, Claire Short...
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 her having substance....people wish her dead now. she has not been in power for a very long time I would argue it was the policies and not the person that people first hated. The hatred of the person manifested itself from the initial anger her policies provoked.
Thedelldays Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 I would argue it was the policies and not the person that people first hated. The hatred of the person manifested itself from the initial anger her policies provoked. and I would bet many, many would disagree
SuperMikey Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 So you are going to milk the tax payer to pay for your education then f*ck off at the first opportunity, backstabbing the country which educated you on the way. What a selfish individual you are. It's an outrage! I'm obviously going to pay back my student loans, i'm not a monster. If you feel that i'm going to stab the country in the back, you obviously think i'm a citizen of value. I thank you for this.
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Ken Clark, Vince Cable, David Willetts, John Denham, Paddy Ashdown, Claire Short... As further examples I don't agree with all they are saying or trying to do but Osborne and Gove have substance and a vision. I think both are flawed, but that's the policies not the men themselves!
shurlock Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Thatcher laid the foundations for Blair and Cameron - a lot of her appeal was style rather than substance. People lapped up the iron lady persona at the time the country was in the doldrums. She succeeded because she appeared populist and authentic, a trick Blair managed to pull off albeit under different circumstances. As Trousers article argued a while back, her policies weren't particularly radical and were pushing with the tide. Like her contemporary Reagan, she was a fantastic actor.
shurlock Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 As further examples I don't agree with all they are saying or trying to do but Osborne and Gove have substance and a vision. I think both are flawed, but that's the policies not the men themselves! Wouldn't agree about Osborne - he's a pragmatist and political strategist through and through. Gove, however, does have a vision even though it is totally demented.
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Thatcher laid the foundations for Blair and Cameron - a lot of her appeal was style rather than substance Whilst she was one of the first to really use spin doctors, IMHO Thatcherism did exist as a vision (even if some of it was transported in from others)
View From The Top Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 Wouldn't agree about Osborne - he's a pragmatist and political strategist through and through. Gove, however, does have a vision even though it is totally demented. I've met Gove a couple of times and I'd agree that he's a conviction politician but f**k me, he really doesn't have a clue and is so, so London centric it's scary
dune Posted 6 October, 2011 Author Posted 6 October, 2011 I've met Gove a couple of times and I'd agree that he's a conviction politician but f**k me, he really doesn't have a clue and is so, so London centric it's scary When Tunderbirds do the musical he'll be a star.
View From The Top Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 When Tunderbirds do the musical he'll be a star. He's so out of touch with reality it really was scary.
Prince Jazzbo Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 My old man reckons we haven't had a good government since the end of WWII. Going by the time that I've been able to vote I'm beginning to think he's right Labour in the 70s - rubbish - Winter of discontent, assisted by the unions. If you think the rubbish in the City is bad now, it was worse then Thatcher - Sorted the unions, then we had the economic miracle that lasted about 6 months, the we had a recession. Major - Liked Cricket and supported Chelsea Blair - Great PR, American puppet, concentrating on foreign policy too much whilst letting Brown loose with the Country's Credit Card Brown - Carried on using the Credit Card, and also did as he was told by the banks. Cameron - Doesnt know whether he should be far right or a bit liberal. Recipe for disaster either way.
Johnny Bognor Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 (edited) Caught some of David Cameron's speech yesterday, what an arrogant arsehole. Calling the Labour party "self-righteous" and then shouting something about all being in it together and then doing a christlike pose on the podium. Look at him at 8:50, the c*nt! Like he'd just finished conducting the Philharmonic or something... Glad he's been found out though, he's just little style and no substance. **** me, you've got a short memory. It wasn't that long ago that this **** was in charge! Yep, the Clown was full of substance alright, what most people refer to as horse **** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDTLUkNVFkY No style, no substance, nothing at all and to think he led the country. Even you would make a better PM! Edited 6 October, 2011 by Johnny Bognor
dune Posted 6 October, 2011 Author Posted 6 October, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYPqAo3UasA God he was a national embarrassment.
um pahars Posted 6 October, 2011 Posted 6 October, 2011 **** me, you've got a short memory. It wasn't that long ago that this **** was in charge! He really was an absolute shocking PM. It was almost as though the Labour Party realised they would not be winning a fourth election and thought, fcck it he might as well have the job he's always wanted. That said, there was that window when he blinked and perhaps missed his chance of winning a snap election. However, I will give him credit when as Chancellor he took the lead in the first recession and helped to negate its effects on the global economy (but he then should have reined in some of the spending mind!!!). PS Despite being an absolute shocker as PM and signing his death warrant with that on microphome "bigot" jibe, Smooth Talking Dave stil couldn't pull a majority!!
Johnny Bognor Posted 7 October, 2011 Posted 7 October, 2011 He really was an absolute shocking PM. !! No question, he was one of the worst It was almost as though the Labour Party realised they would not be winning a fourth election and thought, fcck it he might as well have the job he's always wanted. That said, there was that window when he blinked and perhaps missed his chance of winning a snap election. There were better candidates, however he was always in line for the job, so much for democaracy However, I will give him credit when as Chancellor he took the lead in the first recession and helped to negate its effects on the global economy (but he then should have reined in some of the spending mind!!!). He was part of the problem, so taking some action was the least he could do PS Despite being an absolute shocker as PM and signing his death warrant with that on microphome "bigot" jibe, Smooth Talking Dave stil couldn't pull a majority!! I know. As good as Dave is at the podium or the despatch box, it clearly wasn't enough. I guess Joe Public had enough of the them all. To be fair, I am not too far away from that train of thought. Although my politics are right of centre, I don't feel represented.
View From The Top Posted 7 October, 2011 Posted 7 October, 2011 Although my politics are right of centre, I don't feel represented. I would suggest that the left of centre also don't feel represented. The rush to the centre has alienated both the left and right.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now