It makes more sense when you are rich. When you have a lot of money, power and influence then you can directly benefit in a big way from the things that local politicians/councils etc have control over. It doesn't have to be an entire ideology, it might just be one specific thing that benefits him. He can use his influence to get other people to vote for something that benefits him more.I can’t understand how anyone can move idealistically such a huge distance. It’s such a divergence it’s practically schizophrenic.
It’s one thing to change political allegiance or align with a party on policy lines, but another to adopt a polar ethical centre.
Bonkers.
I don’t think it’s that simple.It makes more sense when you are rich. When you have a lot of money, power and influence then you can directly benefit in a big way from the things that local politicians/councils etc have control over. It doesn't have to be an entire ideology, it might just be one specific thing that benefits him. He can use his influence to get other people to vote for something that benefits him more.
This isn't just about Gibson but all wealthy people with money for donations or influence on a group of people.
When you are rich it doesn't matter if the NHS is crap or the schools are crap etc because you and your kids will never use them. The fundamentals aren't of interest if the only thing you are seeking is improvement of your own circumstances.I don’t think it’s that simple.
These ideologies are polar opposite.
To exaggerate, it would be like oscillating between communism and fascism.
Do these people have no idea what the fundamentals are behind the politics?
That’s not wealth. That is not knowing who you are and having no ethics or values whatsoever.When you are rich it doesn't matter if the NHS is crap or the schools are crap etc because you and your kids will never use them. The fundamentals aren't of interest if the only thing you are seeking is improvement of your own circumstances.
You might recognise that you live in a labour area and the best way to get ahead is through politics and the best chance of winning is with Labour. You might use that power and influence you have to get on boards and be able to do things that benefit you and your business. You might recognise that another candidate has access to funding and access to more power through their connections and switch side to back them and then when that well starts to run dry you move on to the next person.
Rich people are living in a different world to the rest of us.
I think it’s the opposite really. I’d vote for a bell end if I thought he represented what I thought was right. Surely lots of people did that re Boris.
TBH it sounds like Gibson has legitimately just fallen out with Houchen and he’s someone who will happily vote for either party.People would vote for a mannequin in the local election if they wore the same red or blue tie as who represents them in the general elections.
Gibson could be backing the person and not the party.
100%. There are good and/or principled people at all levels of wealth. I didn't mean to tar them all with the same brush, although it does come across like that. The ones that would flip flop between opposite parties aren't those people though. A lot of wealthy people are wealthy because they are ruthless and single-minded so it's not a surprise to see that sort of behaviour from them.That’s not wealth. That is not knowing who you are and having no ethics or values whatsoever.
I know a lot of wealthy people. I may not agree with their principles on occasion but they all have some, at least.
Broadly speaking, I support the Labour Party "no matter what" because it was formed to try and achieve social justice and because I trust that my 3-400,000 fellow members (or comrades in old English) believe in this aim also - and therefore will try and stay true to it. I trust a Government formed on those principles will act in ways that ultimately benefit 'me, my family, my community, my region and my country'. Is that ok by you?So there's people here who support a political party no matter what? Surely you vote depending on your circumstances and how a manifesto would benefit, you, your family, your community, your region and your country? That would surely be the sensible thing to do and probably what Gibbo has done.
I have voted Green Labour and Lib Dem, on policy decisions and leadership.
I could never vote BNP, Conservative, UKiP ( or whatever that is now) or even for a communist party. It doesn’t matter what policy they may be offering, that would benefit me specifically, at the time.
There are core values that underpin these parties, and define what type of society we exist in. You cannot flip flop between them, without being ignorant or a sociopath at best.
Bit strong but there you go.
Or if you thought the candidate of the party you usually support was hopelessly out of their depth and would be unable to perform a key local government role effectively?I don't vote at all so my opinion is potentially void, but...
If you had two options, Labour or Conservative ... Labour came out publicly and said "we will do nothing for Middlesbrough", and Conservative had a constructive plan you agreed with...
... You'd still vote Labour due to the core values of their nationwide counterparts?
It isn't though. The political parties themselves change. Both the tories AND Labour have lurched more to the right in recent times for example.I don’t think it’s that simple.
These ideologies are polar opposite.
To exaggerate, it would be like oscillating between communism and fascism.
Do these people have no idea what the fundamentals are behind the politics?
They can shift, and do adjust, tactically. But strategically they remain the same.It isn't though. The political parties themselves change. Both the tories AND Labour have lurched more to the right in recent times for example.
Yes, so you adjust your voting to suit your needs. I think it's complete folly to vote for a single party all your life just because they are your party. ignoring manifestos, the state of the country etc.They can shift, and do adjust, tactically. But strategically they remain the same.
The posturing is to influence the man in the street, not those at their core.
Yes, within principles.Yes, so you adjust your voting to suit your needs. I think it's complete folly to vote for a single party all your life just because they are your party. ignoring manifestos, the state of the country etc.
Fair enough. I'm nor flexible. Have never associated ,myself with a political party because circumstances changeYes, within principles.
Like I said, I’m definitely never ever going to vote for the BNP, or even the Conservative Party, because of fundamental beliefs.
I don’t blindly vote for the same party out of entrenched conviction. I did already say that.
Like I said, I’m definitely never ever going to vote for the BNP, or even the Conservative Party, because of fundamental beliefs.
If the only capable candidate, and the only party willing to help Middlesbrough, represented the BNP, would you vote for them?
BNP is an extreme example... But if I voted (I don't), I would happily flip flop between Labour and Conservative depending on which candidate I felt would HELP MIDDLESBROUGH (or the Tees Valley).
My decision to help the local area would not be affected by my overall political allegiance.