Jump to content

And They're Off!


Donald Trumps
 Share

How would you vote  

117 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Rhumsaa said:

That point aside being in Comin does not prevent you providing good scrutiny or moving your own issues

The trouble is the voters don't know who's arguing for decent, sensible things in COMIN and then taking flack for stupid decisions they voted against. So it prevents us making an informed decision come election time.

Collective responsibility works with a party system because the party takes the flack or the praise at the next election. Here, we don't know whether our MHK is proposing sensible policies to COMIN and voting against bad ones or the reverse. So come election time the sensible ones may carry the can for the dullards and the fools bask in the glory from good decisions they opposed.

So we don't have collective responsibility we've collective avoidance of responsibility. Not because the principle of collective responsibilty is wrong, but because by standing as independents our politicians are unprincipled cowards.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GreyWolf said:

Go on Derek throw your hat in the ring , I think you may have a shot unless a lot of those constituents you may have met in previous job, though those characters are unlikely to vote.

 

2 hours ago, woolley said:

He'd have a better shot down North wouldn't he?

 

2 hours ago, GreyWolf said:

He would I guess but aren’t Ali and Hoops pretty popular down that way and may be hard to shift also the quality of the Douglas field doesn’t strike me as very strong ( sorry candidates) if I lived there I’d probably vote Josem or give Quine a shot.

If I was looking at it, I wouldn’t want to stand in Ramsey for this precise reason. We’ve two very good politicians in the town and I hope they get back in next time. I’d rather stand somewhere the ‘talent pool’ wasn’t quite as strong. But therein lies the rub; because of our Uber-parochialism, you won’t get a look in unless you are broadly ‘from round these parts’. That’s why we end up with some unbelievably poor choices. 

I think I’ve said before, Churchill stood and won in Dundee! This is why a party politics system would work better if the Island, as a concerted effort could be made across all fronts with a solid bunch of credible candidates. And with a common manifesto, presuming it was any good, the public could likely see the bigger strategic picture for once.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Declan said:

So we don't have collective responsibility we've collective avoidance of responsibility. Not because the principle of collective responsibilty is wrong, but because by standing as independents our politicians are unprincipled cowards.

Is that the system or the politicians though? Personally I feel a scrutiny committee as Lisvane suggested would be the best option for the current system

And is that fact or your perception?

It's hard to judge as the Ministers who have been ejected often come across as being embittered.

As for party politics, I think it's an utterly terrible idea generally and even worse on the IOM, why would we want even more bureaucracy added to the political machine

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

I think I’ve said before, Churchill stood and won in Dundee! This is why a party politics system would work better if the Island, as a concerted effort could be made across all fronts with a solid bunch of credible candidates. And with a common manifesto, presuming it was any good, the public could likely see the bigger strategic picture for once.

 

it would just become Douglas centric though. Same with any kind of non boundary based system, everything would devolve into the Douglas/Onchan/Braddan pool

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

1 hour ago, Rhumsaa said:
The flow of a thread is so important, you can't just weigh in randomly to replies and take things out of context.

:sweat::o:weee::D  Really?? You mean you can't just go off on an incoherent rant and hurl random abuse around? If only you'd laid down that marker years ago everything might have been so different.

I do love MF.

Edited by woolley
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rhumsaa said:

it would just become Douglas centric though. Same with any kind of non boundary based system, everything would devolve into the Douglas/Onchan/Braddan pool

I dunno - but I take your point. I was thinking more about existing sheadings but candidates from anywhere sitting wherever, rather than just those ‘from the village’.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

If I was looking at it, I wouldn’t want to stand in Ramsey for this precise reason. We’ve two very good politicians in the town and I hope they get back in next time. I’d rather stand somewhere the ‘talent pool’ wasn’t quite as strong.

I think your Ramsey assessment is correct but, as you are well aware, and as Donald has already alluded, the North does not only consist of Ramsey.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

I dunno - but I take your point. I was thinking more about existing sheadings but candidates from anywhere sitting wherever, rather than just those ‘from the village’.

 

In the current system that's obviously possible but the populace tend to have a bias towards people in their own community.

So if you move to a party system it will become a matter of maximising your number of candidates who get elected in order to have a majority to control the Government. Well Douglas and Onchan hold 10 of the 24 seats, 14 if you bleed over into Garff & Middle. So what party is going to put the effort into swaying the voters of Bride or traipse through the farms of Andreas, irrespective of the origin of the candidate.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rhumsaa said:

In the current system that's obviously possible but the populace tend to have a bias towards people in their own community.

This is very true, particularly if they are extremely visible there, such as running a local customer facing business, and it helps if they did a stint on the local commissioners too. You can do an awful lot of granny farming well before you stand for the Keys. This is more important when it comes to being elected than having a cogent plan for national issues. Shouldn't be that way, but it is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, woolley said:

This is very true, particularly if they are extremely visible there, such as running a local customer facing business, and it helps if they did a stint on the local commissioners too. You can do an awful lot of granny farming well before you stand for the Keys. This is more important when it comes to being elected than having a cogent plan for national issues. Shouldn't be that way, but it is.

That's true, you could also make the argument that someone who has never shown any interest in your area in the previous 5 years and has never lived there suddenly (and cynically) rocks up in August to win your vote because they figure they have a better chance of getting in there than elsewhere hasn't got your area's best interests at heart but their own.

  • Like 4
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.

Guest
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.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...