Please talk about Politics

[Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz]

Yo. So yesterday, I went on a date and I talked about Politics and I say "I am a Labour supporter, what about you?" and the man there said "I am undecided" so I went through all the reasons why the Tories are ruining the country and Labour is the best party for the country to benefit, anyway, I got the man's number and he tells me to call again, but when I go to my friend's house and tell him about the date, he looks at me sternly and says "It is rude to talk about politics when you are on a date." and I say to him "The man did not think it was rude, he was interested." and he just looks down and says "You are never going to get laid." and I am very shocked and then I said very proudly "Making sure the country benefits is more important than having sex!" anyway this is not the first time this has happened, whenever I am in public talking with people who I meet I ask them about Politics and tell them Jeremy Corbyn is lovely, but I have been asked not to because they say it is rude. Well I do not care! Making sure the country benefits is more important than being polite! So please I urge you to talk about politics, do not worry if it is rude, because the country must benefit!!

[brimstoneSalad]

The trouble with politics is, because it's rarely based on science, you get assertion vs. assertion, and rhetoric vs rhetoric, and that never turns out well. If one party or the other (in the conversation) has a scientific perspective to politics, though, it can be a very engaging and fruitful conversation (provided the other party is reasonable enough to not insist on blind political devotion or decisiveness on issues that can not be decided so easily).

[Red]

The trouble with politics is, because it's rarely based on science, you get assertion vs. assertion, and rhetoric vs rhetoric, and that never turns out well. If one party or the other (in the conversation) has a scientific perspective to politics, though, it can be a very engaging and fruitful conversation (provided the other party is reasonable enough to not insist on blind political devotion or decisiveness on issues that can not be decided so easily).

So are you saying that you don't take part in politics all that much because it's not based on facts, you have to work with what you have, and no one really knows a lot of the things for certain? Or because most of the time, neither side has any idea as to what the fuck they're talking about, and it's just a bunch of jackasses arguing?

[brimstoneSalad]

So are you saying that you don't take part in politics all that much because it's not based on facts, you have to work with what you have, and no one really knows a lot of the things for certain? Or because most of the time, neither side has any idea as to what the fuck they're talking about, and it's just a bunch of jackasses arguing?

I'm not sure what the question is. Both, I guess?

Politics done right does not resemble what we do now. It involves experimentation and objectively crunching data, then implementing the results.

[Red]

I'm not sure what the question is. Both, I guess?

My question was if what I was referring to accurate.

Politics done right does not resemble what we do now. It involves experimentation and objectively crunching data, then implementing the results.

So they're aren't really accurate? Or just not based on logic and evidence?

[brimstoneSalad]

So they're aren't really accurate? Or just not based on logic and evidence?

It's based on rhetoric and faith in party dogma; wherein all parties have points they are right on, and points they are wrong on... all pretty much accidentally.