Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)

[Yertis]

frisbee said:

A country where young people take an interest in politics and play an active part in deciding it's future?

or a country governed via tik-tok

[Shnozz]

frisbee said:

philv said:

Basically rigging future elections.
Changing the system to ensure you stay in power.

Anyone who doesn't see the danger in that deserves to live in a country where that sort of thing leads.

A country where young people take an interest in politics and play an active part in deciding it's future?

The trouble is that a huge proportion of the young people (and beyond into the older generations to be fair) show no interest whatsoever in politics. The polls show that many don’t know any politician beyond the PM and no clue on what policies are proposed or their intended outcome.

It’s why I’m not sure compulsory voting is a good idea. Forcing the uneducated and disinterested to effectively make a lucky dip at the polling stations.

[valiant]

philv said:

Basically rigging future elections.
Changing the system to ensure you stay in power.

Anyone who doesn't see the danger in that deserves to live in a country where that sort of thing leads.

And yet you're silent on voter id that even JRM admitted was an attempt to 'gerrymander' votes.

What? You didn't see the danger there?

[EddieSteadyGo]

Mr Penguin said:

S600BSB said:

Should have happened years ago - brings into line with the Scottish parliamentary elections.

And means that children who are not yet mature enough to smoke or get married or even work full time are mature enough to vote. It's obviously only because they give Labour more votes.

I suppose all parties try and tilt the tilt the scales in their favour, like some of the Conservative attempts at boundary reviews, which whilst having some logic, were enthusiastically pursued by the Conservatives as it would help them electorally. As you say, this is Labour doing the same thing.

The fact that most who are supporting this pretend it is about "getting young people involved" or some other guff, just shows that they are as hypocritical as the Conservatives, in that they will say and do anything if they think it helps their chance of winning.

[EddieSteadyGo]

valiant said:

And yet you're silent on voter id that even JRM admitted was an attempt to 'gerrymander' votes.

What? You didn't see the danger there?

That's a good point on voter ID. Pursued enthusiastically, far beyond the evidence of voter fraud would suggest is necessary, because the Conservatives thought it might work as a barrier to discourage some people from bothering to vote.

[Tankrizzo]

valiant said:

And yet you're silent on voter id that even JRM admitted was an attempt to 'gerrymander' votes.

What? You didn't see the danger there?

Is this how the next five years are going to be? "Labour did this but it's ok because the worst government in living memory also did it"? Great, look forward to it.

[S600BSB]

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr Penguin said:

S600BSB said:

Should have happened years ago - brings into line with the Scottish parliamentary elections.

And means that children who are not yet mature enough to smoke or get married or even work full time are mature enough to vote. It's obviously only because they give Labour more votes.

I suppose all parties try and tilt the tilt the scales in their favour, like some of the Conservative attempts at boundary reviews, which whilst having some logic, were enthusiastically pursued by the Conservatives as it would help them electorally. As you say, this is Labour doing the same thing.

The fact that most who are supporting this pretend it is about "getting young people involved" or some other guff, just shows that they are as hypocritical as the Conservatives, in that they will say and do anything if they think it helps their chance of winning.

If you are old enough to serve your country in HM armed forces then you should be able to vote. Simple. Be a sound change by Labour.

[EddieSteadyGo]

S600BSB said:

If you are old enough to serve your country in HM armed forces then you should be able to vote. Simple. Be a sound change by Labour.

I'm not sure about the actual minimum age for "serving your country" in the army, but if you can't drink and you can't smoke at that age, then the logic would be that you are too young to join the army, rather than it being an argument for lowering the voting age.

[119]

Mr Penguin said:

S600BSB said:

Should have happened years ago - brings into line with the Scottish parliamentary elections.

And means that children who are not yet mature enough to smoke or get married or even work full time are mature enough to vote. It's obviously only because they give Labour more votes.

Of course it is.

I suspect all the youth of today believe is what’s posted on their tik tok reels with the rubbish they are spoon fed

[bitchstewie]

Just as there's absolutely no attempt to influence the elderly with promises of abolishing Inheritance Tax and the Triple Lock is in no way intended to influence their vote.

Swings and roundabouts.

[p1stonhead]

119 said:

Mr Penguin said:

S600BSB said:

Should have happened years ago - brings into line with the Scottish parliamentary elections.

And means that children who are not yet mature enough to smoke or get married or even work full time are mature enough to vote. It's obviously only because they give Labour more votes.

Of course it is.

I suspect all the youth of today believe is what’s posted on their tik tok reels with the rubbish they are spoon fed

As opposed to old people who believe anything written on Auntie Doris’s Facebook page which led to the disaster of Brexit

[Mr Penguin]

119 said:

Of course it is.

I suspect all the youth of today believe is what’s posted on their tik tok reels with the rubbish they are spoon fed

It's a wider problem. People are basing their views on what is equivalent to a single party's own promotional material but without the same factual accuracy.

[119]

bhstewie said:

Just as there's absolutely no attempt to influence the elderly with promises of abolishing Inheritance Tax and the Triple Lock is in no way intended to influence their vote.

Swings and roundabouts.

True.

[768]

S600BSB said:

If you are old enough to serve your country in HM armed forces then you should be able to vote. Simple. Be a sound change by Labour.

You can only join under 18 with parental consent, which says it all.

But you still can't be deployed until 18 and there's pressure from the UN and others to not take them on until 18, in line with most of Europe, which is probably going to happen and seems to be the better fix than lowering voting age.

[Sway]

EddieSteadyGo said:

S600BSB said:

If you are old enough to serve your country in HM armed forces then you should be able to vote. Simple. Be a sound change by Labour.

I'm not sure about the actual minimum age for "serving your country" in the army, but if you can't drink and you can't smoke at that age, then the logic would be that you are too young to join the army, rather than it being an argument for lowering the voting age.

It seems you can join, but go to Army College before entry into standard training.

Considering the rules about employment of minors in things like shops, I'm not sure about what their work actually looks like once they're through that process.

[bitchstewie]

Oh well I guess it's another one for the list of "reasons I could never vote for Starmer even though I never would have anyway" isn't it

[turbobloke]

bhstewie said:

Oh well I guess it's another one for the list of "reasons I could never vote for Starmer even though I never would have anyway" isn't it

Likewise with some other Party's supporters and their opponents.

[p1stonhead]

turbobloke said:

bhstewie said:

Oh well I guess it's another one for the list of "reasons I could never vote for Starmer even though I never would have anyway" isn't it

Likewise with some other Party's supporters and their opponents.

Yeah but starmer hasn’t started yet.

Your lot have destroyed the country for the last 14 years and you still like them

[98elise]

S600BSB said:

EddieSteadyGo said:

Mr Penguin said:

S600BSB said:

Should have happened years ago - brings into line with the Scottish parliamentary elections.

And means that children who are not yet mature enough to smoke or get married or even work full time are mature enough to vote. It's obviously only because they give Labour more votes.

I suppose all parties try and tilt the tilt the scales in their favour, like some of the Conservative attempts at boundary reviews, which whilst having some logic, were enthusiastically pursued by the Conservatives as it would help them electorally. As you say, this is Labour doing the same thing.

The fact that most who are supporting this pretend it is about "getting young people involved" or some other guff, just shows that they are as hypocritical as the Conservatives, in that they will say and do anything if they think it helps their chance of winning.

If you are old enough to serve your country in HM armed forces then you should be able to vote. Simple. Be a sound change by Labour.

You won't be in any conflict at 16.

[98elise]

768 said:

S600BSB said:

If you are old enough to serve your country in HM armed forces then you should be able to vote. Simple. Be a sound change by Labour.

You can only join under 18 with parental consent, which says it all.

But you still can't be deployed until 18 and there's pressure from the UN and others to not take them on until 18, in line with most of Europe, which is probably going to happen and seems to be the better fix than lowering voting age.

There is no reason why you can't join at 16 (I did). Some trades take years of training. My role meant I spent more than 4 years of my service training.