I'm a political nomad

If you think the country is doing well and you are personally doing well too, vote Tory.

If not then it's between a protest vote, tactical vote/Labour or dont vote.

I think the GE is as much about mortality as policy and only you can determine the border between those.

The forum has plenty of opinions (oh yes! 😁) but if you are cynical, it won't change anything for you to be honest. Not criticism, just reality mate.

I'm 55 but I'm actually not that cynical about politics. It really doesn't have to be this way.

Have you ever actually ever met an MP or a government minister?

I have , some were good, some were very very bad.  Some were quite clueless, some very clued in.

People I know in local politics are generally in it to try and help, but I do think that the rise of politics as a career, compared to old school MP's with a bit more life experience is a bad thing

It's also better to be a nomad than utterly dogmatic and vote for a party just because you always have..

I hope Poopascoop meant morality but his possible freudian slip might be more accurate for some...

I think you are in good company in the sense of disillusionment.

This may or may not help but in a way has helped me. I have listened to every episode of The Rest is Politics, it has helped give me, a much better understanding of how politics actually works (or doesn't work). This hasn't fixed everything for me but having a better understanding has helped me cope and have more balance in my thinking.

There is nothing wrong with just voting for a party whose values you share. Many vote Labour quite simply because they believe that a Labour government will always serve their best interests. They really don't need to think about it.

Obviously that has become a challenging theory for some people in the last two or three decades.

Yeah, morality. Bloody phone. 😁

In my lifetime I’d struggle to name a single politician who I would consider as ‘good’.

I’ve known good MPs from all parties, past and present… some now passed… and good candidates who sadly never got to become MPs. Voted LibDem, Green and Labour. Not Conservative. There have been Conservatives who have been in it for the good they they hoped do… but not where I could vote… and very few sitting in parliament currently, IMHO.

As the most obvious example of an MP who does not fit your negative description… Caroline Lucas. Sadly, no one can vote for her this year. A shame. Good luck to her… I’m sure she’ll continue to try and make a positive difference for us all outside parliamentary politics.

Wouldn't worry too much, it may appear on here that voting tory makes you the devil, and voting for Starmer makes you worse, but the reality is that voting is personal, and whoever you vote for, it's your decision.

Like you i just vote for what i'm believing in at the time, in my life i've voted SNP, then Lib Dem when i moved down south, then Labour back in Scotland and then Lib Dem again in the current area, both times i've voted Lib Dem were tactical, the one belief i do have about politics though is that i think a lot of focus is on the 650 politicians in parliament, but they are just the tip of the government iceberg, you have permanent under secretaries, their staffs, and subordinates, these are the people making daily decisions and feeding through info, don't get me wrong, when the likes of the tories get in, they can cause damage, but i do have the belief that there are good people underneath the surface minimising this as much as possible.

Voted LibDem, Green and Labour. Not Conservative.

I thought you had previously said that in your first election you voted Tory?

Nope, LibDem in what was a Tory/LibDem marginal at the time. The Conservatives won the seat, but lost the national election.

I'm a life long "Labour first" voter, mainly as their values do align more closely (but not very closely) with mine.

Politicians I think have been good ... John Smith (who I met) and Barak Obama (who I wish I could meet). On thr flip side, Graeme Stewart is someone who has impressed me with his intelligence, understanding, and sense of humour even though I disagree with the majority of his party's stated policies.

I've met quite a few politicians over the years and generally don't take well to them in person, no matter what party they are part of. Far too many who have opinions without knowledge or any apparent thinking into issues on their own behalf and far too many powered by naked ambition.

All politicians are ****s and I'll never vote for any of them

Have I fallen victim to propaganda?

There may be an element of that. The ruling classes would like nothing more than the proles not being interested in who rules over them. That they are all useless and as bad as each each is a lie that suits the Tories nicely.

Not engaging is a form of support that some political factions are very happy for you to do.

I thought you had previously said that in your first election you voted Tory?

😲 Watch out lads and lasses he's taking notes!  If he asks who you voted for....

Thanks for the interesting responses everyone, I'm heartened to hear there's some good ones out there!

Politics gets weird, it seems like a lot of people treat it like football. You pick a team and support them no matter what.

I could take this further and say I'm politically schizophrenic.

Leftist - I'm strongly in favour of giving a helping hand to those who start out in life in a disadvantaged position (welfare state) and that everyone should have access to healthcare no matter their financial situation (NHS)

Rightist - I'm strongly against mass immigration, DEI, trans stuff in relation to children.

I feel this is a weird position to hold and politically I'm trying to thread the needle but it is what it is.

Strongly against diversity, equity and inclusion?

Why?

Ah, I have just realised who the OP is..... it's billabong!

Forever the provocateur, eh billabong?

Strongly against DEI because it divides people into racial groups/gender. The best person should get the job, role or whatever regardless of any of that stuff.

Yes it is I, I'm not trying to be a provocateur. This is what I believe. If you disagree feel free to rip me to shreds.

Equality means offering the same rights and opportunities to all people.

Diversity is understanding that each person is unique. It means embracing people's differences, including their beliefs, abilities, preferences, backgrounds, values, and identities.

Inclusion is an extension of equality and diversity.

If you disagree with this, you're not really worth my time tbh.

Strongly against DEI because it divides people into racial groups/gender. The best person should get the job, role or whatever regardless of any of that stuff.

That's the trouble really, for years, decades, longer, the best person to get a job had nothing to do with them being the best person. You can break that down to far more than colour too. Their accent, school tie, nepotism etc.

I see nothing wrong in helping a talented white lad from Newcastle and a poor background become an architect, neither do I about helping a similar person with a foreign accent become the same.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

I do not disagree with this.

There's a big difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

There is nothing wrong with just voting for a party whose values you share.

I think being a nomad means that none of them fit?

Clearly no party is going to share every value you have unless you start your own party or stand as an independent but neither of those are realistic so you just have to pick the closest and that is all anyone can do.

I used to vote Labour when they at least pretended to have socialist values but now vote Green as they are closer to my values yet I don't actually care quite as much about the environmental stuff!

I think being a nomad means that none of them fit?

I thought it meant wandering from one party to the next, like a nomad wandering the land? Not necessarily that none of them fit, just that at different times, difference parties are the best fit.

I don't vote.

The government might get in 😯

Our democracy is very flawed, but failing to vote, even if it is to spoil the ballot paper, is a duty that every responsible citizen should undertake.

I get what you mean and inevitably no one party is going to perfectly match your political and ethical beliefs all the time.

Having said that, there is no way my upbringing or morals would ever allow me to vote for the Tories…I’d feel like I was selling my soul.

In my time I’ve voted for: Conservative, Labour, LibDem, Green, SNP and Scottish Socialist. Maybe it’s time to give Reform a go 🙂

@roverpig, maybe not, gotta draw the line somewhere.

I think being a nomad means that none of them fit?

Ah so that explains the Starmer thread.

I don’t vote.

The government might get in

Thats actually quite funny.

But you seem happy to dislike any policy that might fix that ...

The combination of mild leftist economic and populist on culture puts you in a good place for Victor Orban if you can take a bit of corruption

Strongly against DEI because it divides people into racial groups/gender.

All lives matter?

Centre left, socio-capitalist here. Not against folk making money provided everyone in society has both opportunity and a safety net.
If education is an economic benefit then everyone in society should pay for it as we all benefit - and I’m happy to be taxed on that view.
There does need to be some inter-generational truing up as for the last ten years or so (maybe longer, maybe not) the older generations have expected resources spent on them that the younger generations will pay for (see pensions, climate change, university fees).  At 52 I probably sit just into the “older” generations bit.
And the country probably needs more immigration, and probably evenly split across socio-economic profiles to avoid some really horrible effects of immigrants can only have good jobs, but shit jobs are reserved for the indigenous population.

And I’m probably pro-Britain - it has served the Scots, of whom I am one, well overall.  In fact I’m pro-economic unions generally. The administrative blocks need to be bigger than the corporations or democracy fails.

On that basis, not Reform, not Tory (or any of the other right wing anti-Britain, little England parties) and not the SNP even if they were standing in York - but other than that, convince me.

but failing to vote, even if it is to spoil the ballot paper, is a duty that every responsible citizen should undertake.

Ha ha ha ha! Yes of course, everyone should be solemnly thankful and appreciative of the negligible influence they are allowed to exert once every few years over the people who rule us. 🙄

I see Sir Keir on the news again today (Saturday), calling for a ceasefire at some unspecified time in the future. Inspiring

In my lifetime I’d struggle to name a single politician who I would consider as ‘good’. One who actually cares about the normal person on the street.

Aneurin Bevan, FDR, Clement Attlee, Mo Mowlam, Dennis Skinner, Alf Dubbs...

Perhaps more controversially, I have a friend who's father worked with John Major.  They've nothing but praise for him as a human being, apparently a very nice man.  The same applies to someone else I know who sort of knows Gordon Brown.

Centre left, socio-capitalist here. Not against folk making money provided everyone in society has both opportunity and a safety net.

100% ^

I could never vote Tory. They’re too self-centred to be good for society, especially now.

Lived for 34 years in one of the strongest Conservative constituencies - never bothered voting, it was just pointless. In my previous job, I spent a fair amount of time working with Government departments in Whitehall and some cross-sector initiatives - since 2010, it was noticeably how ‘political’ everything came, policy and dogma over outcome. After 2015 it was joint pointless - everything ditched for the altar of Brexit.

The UK is now little Britain - internationally shrinking in the eyes of the world and totally in the thrall of a corrupt media. The main parties are effectively 2 cheeks of the same arse - only working at the behest of their sponsors, doing nothing to unify or rebuild the UK and getting us back in the EU. Reunification of Ireland is almost inevitable and hopefully Scottish independence too.

All politicians are **** and I’ll never vote for any of them

Luckily, by refusing to vote for any of them, they make sure to leave you alone and not interfere in your life in return.

Oh, wait....

Lived for 34 years in one of the strongest Conservative constituencies – never bothered voting

Same for me for 25 years. I still vote as it is on the way to work in the morning when it is quiet but it is a waste of time. What highlights how crap the system is that the council elections (with smaller areas than the government elections) returned a Green and Independent for my specific area which makes me feel a bit happier about the specific area I live in although still a tory majority council because of all the ****ers in the other areas!

What do you mean by trans stuff in relation to children? What defines children? I'm just trying to decide whether to even get into a debate with you.

This - the gradual othering of the trans community is one of the reasons my vote will be for whoever has the chance to beat the Tory candidate. Right now it's nicely simmering away just under the surface, but if these were to get another go, emboldened, I am hugely concerned about what follows. They must not get the chance.

To clarify I meant any kind of medical intervention for children. Be that puberty blockers, hormones or surgery.

I've been mulling over whether to respond to this because I have a pretty good idea where it's going to go and I very much doubt it will be informative or productive.

To clarify I meant any kind of medical intervention for children. Be that puberty blockers, hormones or surgery.

what business is it of yours?

Define children?

Puberty blockers for example - although a bit 'juries out' on this, partly because without support and appropriate trials it's tricky to absolutely know the long term effects. My son started on them late, after puberty had started, and we have to pay for it privately - not because it's not available on the NHS, but because the CAMHS and GIDS are so underfunded he's been on waiting lists for assessment way beyond when they would have been most useful.

As a result he is going to have to have (also privately funded, if anyone has a spare £8000 let me know) costly, painful and debilitating surgery to reverse what could have been delayed. The surgeon(s) we are in contact with will not even consider doing that until he's 18 and after several consultations to make sure he's aware of what he is opting for.

I’ve been mulling over whether to respond to this because I have a pretty good idea where it’s going to go and I very much doubt it will be informative or productive.

I'm pleased you did and I at least will try to keep it respectful if I can. Respectfully, seems like you have an opinion but might not actually be particularly informed and thought through. So hopefully it will be informative to you.

Thankyou jon, I also hope this could be informative. I feel like I'm walking into a minefield here so I'd like to make clear I have great sympathy for you and your son, the last thing I would want is to make light of your situation, say something hurtful or come across like I know better than you about what is best for your son.

I believe in UK law a child is under 18.

Both you and your son are clearly sure this is the best path forward for him so perhaps starting on puberty blockers early could have really helped.

I think this is where we get into a grey area about what a child can consent to, can a child fully understands the long term implications of medical intervention at a young age?

To give an example I have a friend who's son had a really difficult time in his teens. He was absolutely adamant for a long time that he was trans. When he got to 17/18 he just kind of grew out of it and is now a happy gay man. These are the children I worry about, he could easily have gone down a different path that would have potentially effected him for life.

So to pick up on your train of thought from the previous page, you think that the best way to navigate this grey area is to avoid teaching children about DEI and trans issues? I can see why you have trouble finding a political home, as said earlier in the thread though, sounds like you'd be perfectly at home with Reform.

I believe in UK law a child is under 18

That's a cop out answer. I asked you - Define Children?

Does your answer mean you're against any sort of medical intervention including PB's and hormones for someone under 18, because then you say say that you're sure that we're making the best decisions for him. Which meant finally getting PB's at about 15 to stop further development and stopping monthly bleeding, etc. You think we should be lawfully stopped from doing that, or not?

Tom - Depends what we mean by DEI and trans issues.

If for DEI it means that everyone should have the same opportunities regardless of whether they're black, white, brown, man, woman, rich, poor or whatever else, that's completely fine by me and should be encouraged. If it means filling roles and positions based on any of that to fill some kind of diversity quota then definitely not.

For trans again it depends. If we're teaching them that gender dysphoria is a thing and that trans people deserve compassion and understanding, no problem. If we're teaching them that men can in fact become women and vice versa then no.

jon - yes it was a cop out answer. I was undecided between 16 and 18 so went with that. On further thought you can legally have sex at 16 and drive at 17, both of which have potential life altering consequences, I'll go with no medical intervention under the age of 16.

That being said if it was proven that puberty blockers could be taken for a couple of years and then stopped with no negative repercussions then I'd be open to changing my mind. I don't see how this could be but you probably know vastly more about them than I do.

So, as I see it, you want to go back to a time before DEI was quite so prevalent, when privileged white men had all the advantages/power/money. Cool.

You also don’t want people to have a say what happens to their own bodies until it’s too late. Cool.

And all that seeming comes before the economy, education, housing, defence, foreign policy/the EU etc.

There’s a couple of parties that will happily take your support/donations I think, none of them will get anywhere near Westminster, but you’ll be helping keep the top brass in a coutts account.

So you support NHS and some form of welfare state but are socially a good fit for reform/ukip/Brexit.....I suppose that you're just mainly on the right of the Tory party then. Doesn't seem like you're a nomad at all. You seem to be having the same sort of turmoil as lot a lot of the Tory party. Hopefully that way of thinking is going to be enjoying a record defeat this year 👍

Perhaps I'm expressing myself poorly tom. I want to live in a time where the only consideration is competence. I don't care if that's a privileged white man, disadvantaged black woman or anything else. Merit should be the only metric.

I'm totally ok with adults doing whatever they so wish with their own bodies. My point was I'm not sure a child can fully understand and consent to medical interventions that could have life long consequences.

I'm a little baffled how this is considered controversial.

Ok, point 1 is that in a lot of cases - not all, granted - lack of intervention can lead to outcomes with long term consequences. Some are potentially reversible, some may not be. Mental health in the TG community is a major issue and take it from me, " you're a child, you can't possibly understand how you feel and what you want" being one of them - your childhood years should be the best of your life and the trauma can be life lasting.  That's before self harm and suicide, both of which are ever present thoughts to my wife and I - sometimes higher, sometimes lower, but always there.

2/ in many areas we allow parents, guardians, healthcare representatives to make best decisions where we deem a child unable to. Gillick competencies, etc. in lower age groups the child may have strong views that are listened to but do not have final agency. Your opening position on this removes agency on the basis of a date on a birth certificate, as does aligning to a party that believes in this, or is likely to harden to this.

3/ much of what is currently permitted by regs, guidelines and so on is in reality not because the services set up that should support (and yes, right or wrong 'gatekeep') have been so chronically underfunded by this party and nearly 14 years of mismanagement. I'm lucky; it's cost thousands and will cost thousands more for the private equivalent but at least we can do it with sacrifices elsewhere. We've not had a holiday for 5 years, my cars 100k mile's, my bike's from 2011. We had no choice....yet some on here and elsewhere call me a child abuser, of mutilating my child's body. You might stop short of that but a vote for what would come with another 5 years of this Government emboldened might not put you in the same room as them but you're in the same house

Think hard with your nomadic agency. And please do some reading because right now I'm minded of my Dad's saying - "opinions are like arseholes.... everyone has one but some are covered in shit"

Rightist – I’m strongly against mass immigration, DEI, trans stuff in relation to children.

I’m a little baffled how this is considered controversial.

Really?!  Jon probably puts these much things more eloquently than me, and really deserves a medal for the empathy he shows in his posts given the current toxicity that some people seem to revel in.

I believe in UK law a child is under 18.

A gentle reminder that we have four nations making up the United Kingdom, each with their own laws.

I'm also of the view that a) I can always be better informed b) I am comfortable being challenged in my views by considering other views and c) I will never find a political party I wholly agree with - but make my decision on balance and on direction of travel.

If we’re teaching them that men can in fact become women and vice versa then no.

That's where you're going wrong. The kids are perfectly capable of figuring this stuff out for themselves and don't need any 'teaching' from us. In fact it's not them that need teaching it's us!

Thankyou jon for taking the time to explain a little about your perspective on such a personal and difficult subject.

For what it's worth I've listened to a good few interviews from both people who've transitioned and detransitioned so I'm not completely ignorant, just mostly! It's pretty harrowing stuff all round.

If there's any reading you would recommend I'd be interested to do so.

Unless you want to keep going perhaps we should leave it there for now. I'm well aware how easily topics like these go off the rails and I rather not be the cause.

I want to live in a time where the only consideration is competence.

The problem is that the judgement of "competence" is all too often biased towards white middle-class men such as myself. This is hardly controversial and anyone with a passing interest in the topic is well aware of the issue which suggests you're playing the role of a boring troll.

I want to live in a time where the only consideration is competence.

That assumes all things leading to someone becoming competent, then put themselves forward for consideration, are equal.

For example, there might be loads of refugee women that are brilliant nurses or care workers, but you want to stop mass immigration.

which suggests you’re playing the role of a boring troll.

I don't see a Troll. I see someone who expressed some views I don't agree with and which go against the grain on here, but who (it seems to me) is genuinely trying to understand a different perspective from his own.

A good thing no?

As soon as the name calling starts, any chance someone might listen and even reevaluate their views is dead in the water.

Kudos to @theotherjonv for their tolerance and for doing an incredible job of articulating some of the issues around this subject.

I usually vote Lib Dem, but they have no chance  in my constituency. I have also voted, Labour, Green, even Conservative (once, to keep loony Jeremy Corbyn out).

I am a digital subscriber to the Economist, and their analysis of Kier Starmer's recovery policy means that I will be voting Labour in the next GE.

@blokeuptheroad: I totally agree with your point, I occasionally leave this forum because of the "I think differently to you and you are a monster" attitude of some members.

because of the “I think differently to you and you are a monster” attitude of some members.

You have just called Jeremy Corbyn a "loony", presumably because you don't agree with his politics rather than because you think he has mental health issues.

I am not sure what that says about people on here who voted Labour at the last general election.

I agree with the sentiment behind your comment though - it would be nice if people showed a little more respect towards those with a different political position to theirs 👍

I am a digital subscriber to the Economist, and their analysis of Kier Starmer’s recovery policy means that I will be voting Labour in the next GE

Is that being shared with the rest of the voters any time soon?

I occasionally leave this forum because of the “I think differently to you and you are a monster” attitude of some members.

On some stuff my views are so formed (and maybe even entrenched) and the alternate opinions just so simply incorrect that while I'll still try to convince them civilly, in the end I can't escape that if they stick to their position then I just can't bring myself to be that tolerant.

We faced it with some friends and family and I would absolutely drop them if they held the views that Billabong initially proposed. Denying adolescents - not just adolescents; pre-adolescents as they are the ones where the benefit is most - access to PB's for example.

With billabong; are they a troll? I have like many wearied of new members with 'alternative' views, suspicious in some cases that they are just returning trolls. I'm not 100% sure here, but the name is an easy one to remember so when 'alternate' views keep cropping up and the name is notable......I'm obviously sensitive to TG issues so when they were against the Dr Who episode a temporary label was applied, since when they haven't substantially done much to change my view.

a look at threads they have started since joining in Aug last year

- libtards vs gammons

- this one

- one on shocks that could have been easily written with little actual knowledge and then no further participation in the debate

and in replies to other threads, among some fairly normal stuff (building a cover story?)

- if I was american I'd have voted for Trump both times

- knives; I carry a lock knife; I’m fully aware it’s illegal but I don’t care, when it breaks or I lose it I'm buying another.

- covid enquiry; quickly threw support behind obvious troll alex22

- and a very 'alternative position' about immigration, etc., on the far right thread

Troll, edgelord, or just someone whose views are too diametrically opposed to the ones I hold dear.... in the end does it really make a huge difference.

And the reasonable 'thanks for taking the time to explain' - still not sure if it washes.

I have a great many flaws. I'm stubborn, argumentative, contrary and opinionated to name just a few. One thing I'm not is a troll. If I wanted to troll STW I'd start a thread about e bikes, the best way to make avocado on toast or how to fit more log burners in my house.

and jon, you can say or think what you like about me but I assure you that my thanks to you for being so open and honest about such a personal topic are sincere. If I was in your shoes I doubt I would do that.

It's not "contrary" to parrot talking points of RW conspiracy theorist loons. It's just tedious.

If I wanted to troll STW I’d start a thread about e bikes

I left that off the list; IIRC you were for delimited max power in all places sod the eco modes on that thread?

oh yeah, forgot about that one. It was a little tongue in cheek but that is the ebike I want to see, I don't think I said unlimited but I could be wrong. I basically want a downhill bike that I can turbo around constantly for many many miles. I think it would be brilliant fun.

I've been on psyche.co again, this time, an article about 'rhetorical fig leaves', ie the spreading bigoted/prejudiced messages but framed in such a way as to distance oneself from them, the example (of Joe Rogan) given:

This doctor was saying ivermectin is 99 per cent effective in treating Covid, but you don’t hear about it because you can’t fund vaccines when it’s an effective treatment … I don’t know if this guy is right or wrong. I’m just asking questions.

https://psyche.co/ideas/beyond-dogwhistles-racists-have-a-new-rhetorical-trick

Plenty of folk on here have mastered the art. Others, not so much.

"I don’t know if this guy is right or wrong. I’m just asking questions."

Doesn't sound very STW to me.