A really bitterly cold morning. The ice on the car really took some shifting. I almost used up an entire bottle of spray anti-freeze. I have to be really careful with cold that intense. I get a real pain in my chest. Not sure I want to induce another heart attack as a result. I think it's because your arteries close up or something. Stops blood pumping through. I'm not going to see what happens so I'd rather be in the warm. The central heating is on. I turned it up a notch yesterday.
So, today is Donald Trump's inauguration. I'm not so sure how I feel about the man. He's made some really nasty comments, he's divisive, what will his Presidency be like? How will we, in Great Britain, get on with the man? More or less the complete opposite ideologically, to Barak Obama. Sorry to see him go. Let's wait and see what happens. I think Trump's style of campaigning during the run-up to the U.S. Election was based on his experience of being on the reality television show "The Apprentice." These shows rely on 'sound bites.' They need them so that people make comments on social media, such as Facebook and Twitter. He has used these 'sound bites' to get a reaction, to get people talking, whether for good or bad. He just needs to temper his comments. He says something, and then sometimes regrets it. Something like "The Apprentice" has catch phrases such as 'Your Fired!" which everyone knows. The same with "Strictly Come Dancing" which is manipulated by the media to give it the best stories which can be reproduced in the Tabloid press. Whenever one of the judges says something nice or nasty, it gets a headline in 'The Sun' or 'The Mail.' (Other tabloid newspapers are available.) Do Americans realise that 'Trump' has a different meaning in this country? As George Bernard Shaw so succinctly said about American and British 'English' and the difference, 'two countries divided by one language.'
As for Brexit (I'm sorry, but I hate the term.), why didn't our politicians make more effort to actually EXPLAIN what the E.U. was about, well in advance of the Referendum in June? How many voters in that vote actually know what they were voting for? So many people, particularly those in the youngest age-group, say from 18-30, don't appear to have any interest in politics. I know the scandal of M.P's expenses a few years ago tarnished the reputation of Parliament and it's members, which is understandable, but how many people really understand what we got out of the E.U.? If you don't understand the process of Parliament or the E.U. (which also has itself to blame.) how can anyone make an unbiased decision, to leave or remain, if they aren't given the facts? most young people seem more interested in celebrity culture, reality television, the latest football results, than politics and in particular, the E.U. How many people do you see walking about the streets with their mobile phones in their hands, and not actually interacting with the world around them? When the result of the Referendum is going to have such far-reaching consequences, wouldn't it have been more important to vote in this important Referendum than keeping your face glued to a stupid mobile telephone? It was the tabloid press in Britain who were very much responsible for giving the E.U. a negative presentation, which would have swung there readers towards voting to leave. I also blame the government who drafted the legislation which allowed the Referendum. Why did they not have a clause in that which said that the vote either for or against, had to be of a certain percentage one way or another, to allow for a leave or remain decision? The fact that the 'Leave' vote was so low, I don't know the exact figure, but it was as low as 1-2% in favour of leaving the E.U.
Having done some research on the subject of the Referendum on the internet, I find that around 25,000 votes were invalid or blank. What are we to make of this? Why were they 'invalid'? Are some people so stupid that they spoilt their ballot papers so they became invalid? Didn't they think the vote was important enough to use this Referendum properly and actually vote one way or the other? If they had voted, perhaps the difference in the outcome would have been very different. It just shows the ignorance of some people knows no bounds.
Having done some research on the subject of the Referendum on the internet, I find that around 25,000 votes were invalid or blank. What are we to make of this? Why were they 'invalid'? Are some people so stupid that they spoilt their ballot papers so they became invalid? Didn't they think the vote was important enough to use this Referendum properly and actually vote one way or the other? If they had voted, perhaps the difference in the outcome would have been very different. It just shows the ignorance of some people knows no bounds.
No comments:
Post a Comment