howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
interesting to read how political parties are losing members overall, but the national trust is gaining more.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-membership-in-crisis-as-the-grassroots-desert-7986155.htmlGuest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
What this trend seems to show is that the more right wing and dare one say it ...the more extremist the Conservatives go, the more their membership increases. Wishy washyism is not going down well in the home counties, in the shires, they want strong beliefs in the traditional Tory stuff..like anti the EU for example and with no truck for the Libdems soft sell. But what the Tory faithful at grass roots are having a hard time coming to terms with... is that they failed to win the last election.
Cameron also found that in government isolating yourself from the EU is not an option. Might sound great in opposition but not practical in government. We see on Barrys Blog today how all our economics seems to depend on the state of the EU's finances. Barry talks of triple dip recession here...all based on poor times in Europe.
The interesting thing..as the Conservatism membership sinks the Labour membership increases. Gordie Brown did nothing at all for populism at any level..so membership haemorraged...but its up again since young Ed took hold of the reins. But nothing like in Tony Blairs day...but I guess looking back TB was a bit of a one off phenomenon..."things can only get better" and all that, well it grabbed the imagination.
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
I've never understood the point of belonging to a political party, there is nothing to be gained.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
usually it is people who are totally committed to a particular party whilst the rest of us vote for the party we dislike the least.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
lol!
David I suppose whats gained by joining one or the other party is that you can play an active part in getting the opposition out of power, or to put it Howards way, getting the one you least like out of power. There is probably some satisfaction in delivering leaflets and so on, particularly if you are well miffed with the opposition over a particular tax hike or something.
Here we see Paul Watkins himself out with several such volunteers during the last election...active bods, all shovelling madly in support of the local leader!
I wonder what the trend is though. Do all parties in power lose members? thats the key question. People are motivated more by dislike of the opposition I suspect rather than a devotion to active service for their own side.
As an aside I see the unpopularity of David Cameron has raised its ugly head again...Im talking about within Conservative ranks. With the fall from grace of Osborne, young Boris is being touted for leader like never before, this following his high powered pop-star involvement with the Olympic Games. It surprises me about Cameron, he appears tailor made for the job. A natural Tory if ever there was one...but..there are grumblings of serious disatisfaction amongst the rank and file..
Guest 714- Registered: 14 Apr 2011
- Posts: 2,594
I wouldn't describe him as a natural Tory Paul, he is pro Europe and gay marriage, two things that traditional Tories instinctly oppose.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
....and those who think the convivial, chummy, witty, classical Greek quoting, faux buffoon, tousled haired one might be a good choice for PM need to get a grip pretty damned quick.
Boris is certainly not one to be trusted. Nasty and Machiavellian and in terms of saying what he thinks the public want to hear he makes Cameron seem positively intellectual.
Check out his world view a few years before he was elected Mayor and compare and contrast with his, erm, "views" now.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
spot on philip he is indeed a cunning manipulator that has carefully distanced himself from damaged goods dave.
boris will tailor his views to the audience he is facing, i shudder to think of him as prime minister.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
I became a member of English Heritage along with my mum earlier this year, and proudly paid for both of us out of my hard-worked for money.
The contributions for membership are of reciprocal advantage, for example I can enter the Castle free of charge. The knowledge that English Heritage invest the money in England for the upkeep off our Heritage is satisfying, and indeed the more people join English Heritage, the more we will all benefit from it.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Pity they don't invest in the parts of the Western Heights they own then Alexander.
Roger
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#3, David, not belonging to a party gives you the freedom to have honest discussions and become friends with those of all parties, not just one. Political parties seem almost like competing religions or freemasonries and being committed to membership of none really is liberating.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
you couldn't be more right peter, i said the same thing to posh barry at his lodge last st swithins day.
we have to be more open with the populace at large.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Howard, you dyed-in-the-wool lefty, you!
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
come the glorious day peter you will be the first up against the wall facing the firing squad.
comfort yourself with the fact that blue barry will be standing right in front of you.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#11 - Actually Peter being a member of a political party has never prevented me from being free to have honest discussions or be friends with people who are members of other parties. It does not work like you suggest.
I have some long-standing friends in the Labour Party though, suddenly, in 1991 after the local elections, they were told they should not fraternise and became nervous looking over their shoulder when speaking to Conservatives in public. I found that very sad and it was easy to spot the new 'hard men' who made it difficult for them. That though does not have to be a problem and, I suspect, those 'hard men' are not people worth becoming friendly with and that is nothing to do with their politics or party membership.
I have remained friends with many old Labour and LibDem councillors/former councillors from the old days.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Interesting re number 6
the problem nowadays is that there is a swell of national 'cool' opinion and all must stick to it or hark and horror, get a kicking on Twitter or whatehaveyou by the millions. Which in turn will cause uproar in the following days newspapers. The eye is always on the goal for the modern politician...whether he or she believes in the true agenda or topic or not.
Gay Marriage...now there's a topic with hidden shadows. Perhaps when the Prime Minister is at a dinner party, with or without Rebecca Brookes, the conversation may well turn to general proper debate, and he may well feel differently about gay marriage than he might be able to say in public. Therein lies the modern problem, with instant often superthick comment available to all and sundry.
The nation follows a cautious path and Tory leaders are no different.
Nobody dare speak against gay marriage...not if you are relying on populism for your future role in life, because its cool to be one way with the amassed voters on Twitter, and not cool to be the other.
But look at these same voices on Twitter. This week we have had controversy after controversy with people on there still putting their foot in their mouth.
First up is Conservative MP Adrian Burley...already soiled his image with Nazi-ism.. now here he is on Twitter calling the Olympic Ceremony "Leftie Nonsense" and worse. It caused uproar. The PM didnt like that one and called him an idiot.
Then we had Rio Ferdinand calling a fellow black footballer a "choc ice". This it seems, although I didnt previously know myself, but this it seems refers to someone who is black on the outside and white on the inside. A term of racial abuse aimed at Ashley Cole. Ferdinands brother Anton has just finished a case based on racial abuse and here we are still in the ghastly mix with his very own brother. if black players call each other names like this how are we to progress across the board. Ferdinand is now up before the FA.
Then we had the abuse of Tom Daley the Olympic diver who was attacked because he didnt win gold with ugly references to his father and long time coach who has recently died. The culprit in this case was arrested by the police today.
Then we had the black female weightlifter Team GB's Zoe Smith who was also abused on Twitter and was delighted to be able to answer the abusers with a medal.
Unfortunately I think Twitter is shaping how we seem to progress or not as the case may be, even tip top politicians are wary of its power and adjust their sights and ambitions accordingly. The further up the polictical ladder you go the more you have to adjust your sights and ambitions. Odd isnt it.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Recently in a Deal pub I overheard a black customer say that he was proud to be a n***** but angry that using the word only upset white people.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
i have to agree with barryw (help!!!!!!!!)
i have friends in the tory party lib dem and non political people
not so many in the labour party these days lol
but im open to discuss with Anyone==
barryw and i may not ever agree on much
but thats
doesnt mean we fall out
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
