Jump to content

Voter apathy, right


Recommended Posts

So how do we deal with it (CBC). Like how many times can you say: here, left porridge, or there on the right, the oatmeal. And sorry no other choices, before it instills in you, any reasonable normal consumer of breakfasts an undeniable feeling of boredom, and right, "apathy".

Maybe we should have another panel on why porridge and oatmeal are the best, the healthiest (and the only available, yes you know) breakfast options? Wow, what a great idea! How did you get there, genius? What inspired you?

What's that murmur, "change"? How can you change something that hasn't changed like ever, since day one and long before then? Nah let's just have another panel. That works, surely.

 

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

And hurray, as foretold and and predicted in generations yes! we're having another panel! (TVO). Quoting: "we have to find ways to listen more closely blah".

What change? Why? Isn't this working perfectly already as for u.. sorry you? OMG. No, change is not possible. Abandon hope...

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/7/2022 at 5:41 PM, myata said:

1. So how do we deal with it (CBC). Like how many times can you say: here, left porridge, or there on the right, the oatmeal. And sorry no other choices, before it instills in you, any reasonable normal consumer of breakfasts an undeniable feeling of boredom, and right, "apathy".

2. How can you change something that hasn't changed like ever, since day one and long before then? Nah let's just have another panel. That works, surely.

 

1. I agree that a CBC panel on reinventing politics is a ridiculous idea. It's like asking a ghost to remember what life was like.

2. If you look at the 20th century there. During which changed happened quite quickly. I suspect the generations coming up will move politics more into an online frame and therefore be more responsive to what's going on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

 

"The danger to Canada is not Justin Trudeau, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him as Prime Minister.   It is less likely to survive the multitude of fools who made him their Prime Minister."

And of course it all comes down to Auntie Trudeau as though O'Toole was so much better.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Justin Trudeau as seen

It's way, way bigger than Justine. I could try to describe it - again, but oh.. the apathy. In short, it's the whole country. Us. It's we how ensure and guarantee what no change is possible here. Not saying ever because it can still happen - the hard way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

and therefore be more responsive to what's going on.

That's all what is wrong here. This is almost word to word that Kathleen Wynne said in the panel yesterday.

"More responsive" is a vague, fuzzy notion and Wynne will be very happy with that! Even now, like two terms out of power she still counts herself as "us" more responsive (sic) to "you" there down below. No we don't need "responsive", we need effective in solving our issues and problems (try calling virtually any govt office good luck); efficient, including cost (why do we need 24+ levels of management hierarchy doing what - for us?) and real, visible results. This is quite obviously not the same, and with only a small effort could be made the opposite of "responsive".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. I agree that a CBC panel on reinventing politics is a ridiculous idea. It's like asking a ghost to remember what life was like.

2. If you look at the 20th century there. During which changed happened quite quickly. I suspect the generations coming up will move politics more into an online frame and therefore be more responsive to what's going on.

Online politics? Oh goodie. A new and better way to cheat.

Mike we both know online communication from the public will result in no change at all. In fact...all it will do is free up phone lines and produce less letters decorating the trash can.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

In fact...all it will do is free up phone lines and produce less letters decorating the trash can.

Yes we need to be more responsive in this digital age! Try calling a government office of your choice. Let's have an improvement: a bot responding you have options 1, 2 and 3 or call this number (and the same at the other number). All 24 levels of management freed to work productively on... what?

Change without changing anything, how good you can get at it in some twenty decades? "Yes we have to be more responsive to ..." (append as and when needed). We get what we accept that is quite certain.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As old-man Trudeau was known to say, Canadian voters do not give sh*t, as long as there’s beer in the fridge. 

His son follows the same path. “Let them have drugs.” That is why he will always be emperor.

In other words, opium shall be the opium for the masses.

The people shall always elect

their drug dealer

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

As old-man Trudeau was known to say, Canadian voters do not give sh*t, as long as there’s beer in the fridge. 

His son follows the same path. “Let them have drugs.” That is why he will always be emperor.

In other words, opium shall be the opium for the masses.

The people shall always elect

their drug dealer

Not this people. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, myata said:

1. No we don't need "responsive", we need effective in solving our issues and problems (try calling virtually any govt office good luck);
2. efficient, including cost (why do we need 24+ levels of management hierarchy doing what - for us?) and real, visible results.

 

1. Fair enough but without an informed and engaged electorate they'll be solving the wrong problems, just to point out.
2. Agreed.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

1. Mike we both know online communication from the public will result in no change at all.
2. In fact...all it will do is free up phone lines and produce less letters decorating the trash can.

1. Why do you think *I* think that ?
2. It will be faster though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Why do you think *I* think that ?
2. It will be faster though.

1. Because I don't think you're a plank.

2. lol...ya...faster to dispose of and forget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. Because I don't think you're a plank.

2. lol...ya...faster to dispose of and forget.

1. What does that mean ?
2. Faster - that's what 'responsive' means.  It is important, although I heartily agree with your point about effectiveness and efficiency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Fair enough but without an informed and engaged electorate they'll be solving the wrong problems, just to point out.

First, informed and engaged electorate would need to create a system of governance that would reflect and prioritize their problems and needs rather than its own. In this country nothing like that exists. The system has been stitched hastily on top of colonial administration and its main priority is to continue itself. Does it, informed and engaged exist? Probably not - the political history of 160 years speaks for that. And one has to agree, it's where the core of the problem is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Would you be one of the fools the Prague writer refers to?  Many here think you may be.  Carry on.

No I didn't vote for Trudeau nor do I support him.

The idea that someone who responds to baseless criticism about him favours him is amoeba level thinking.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

Not this people. 

Yeah because you know what that does. It is that simple. And that is what politics has descended to in this country, under Justin Trudeua. Sic man, sic.

Therefore I say unto you, I say... these people are not necessarily apathetic, but stoned.

;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No I didn't vote for Trudeau nor do I support him.

The idea that someone who responds to baseless criticism about him favours him is amoeba level thinking.

Again, and predictably, you've used your formula deflection to O'Toole whenever there's anything critical said about your 'prince of fools' . . . Prague writer had you pegged.  Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, myata said:

1. First, informed and engaged electorate would need to create a system of governance that would reflect and prioritize their problems and needs rather than its own. In this country nothing like that exists.

2. The system has been stitched hastily on top of colonial administration and its main priority is to continue itself. Does it, informed and engaged exist? Probably not - the political history of 160 years speaks for that. And one has to agree, it's where the core of the problem is.

1. Yes but this could come from any quarter.
2. I suspect we are waiting for leaders to emerge under the new model.  Can you imagine a person who speaks to all Canadians ?  I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Again, and predictably, you've used your formula deflection to O'Toole whenever there's anything critical said about your 'prince of fools' . . . Prague writer had you pegged.  Carry on.

Yes and democracy can be fixed with F*** Trudeau flags.... honk on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

No I didn't vote for Trudeau nor do I support him.

The idea that someone who responds to baseless criticism about him favours him is amoeba level thinking.

There is plenty available for criticism there

Unless one admires mere socks and hair

Even without a political conscience one must agree

A bad representative of Canada PM blackface must be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,213
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Ronald Tolkien
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...