What's Next

CapeXit? Separatists bid to split South Africa

vigras rojara said:
Blah blah blah.

I believe the concept is flawed. If the CI movement were competent, they may have been able to persuade me otherwise.

Instead, we just witness a bunch of bumbling buffoons with no chance of achieving anything.
Click to expand...

"CI movement" would encompass all of the groups and their efforts as one concept.
(CIP is the one party only, for those who didn't get that difference.)

In all fairness, the RP is brand new and the only likely reason we're having this debate 'cos they HAVE managed to finally get the CI subject stirred up enough to generate mass interest / fascination.
So shouldn't be included in the wider negative branding.
 
vigras rojara said:
Blah blah blah.

I believe the concept is flawed. If the CI movement were competent, they may have been able to persuade me otherwise.

Instead, we just witness a bunch of bumbling buffoons with no chance of achieving anything.
Click to expand...
Sorry, why is it flawed?
 
Brian_G said:
"CI movement" would encompass all of the groups and their efforts as one concept.
(CIP is the one party only, for those who didn't get that difference.)

In all fairness, the RP is brand new and the only likely reason we're having this debate 'cos they HAVE managed to finally get the CI subject stirred up enough to generate mass interest / fascination.
So shouldn't be included in the wider negative branding.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I meant to include them all, as collectively nothing ever happens.

Agree that perhaps the RP should be given the benefit of the doubt for now though.
 
Brian_G said:
They can't merge.

The RP stands for the single value this year of getting the DA to accept and act on believed public desire for a referendum, otherwise "siding" with the DA - far from how CIP are trying to approach the subject and not gonna change beforehand as it would crumble the CIAG / RP's clever poker hand.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget that 'clever poker hand' is exactly the strategy employed by the Cape Party/CIP if not since 2007, then since very early on i.e. get the DA below 50% in the WC and then negotiate a referendum.

I don't think the RP's values fall under their strategy... not unless they are made of the same political stuff as the DA, ANC etc. who feel nothing about pandering to the cheapest votes on offer.
 
lexity said:
Let's not forget that 'clever poker hand' is exactly the strategy employed by the Cape Party/CIP if not since 2007, then since very early on i.e. get the DA below 50% in the WC and then negotiate a referendum.
Click to expand...
Hardly. They neither had the visible backing needed by far, nor the cheek to suggest they otherwise support the DA.
To a degree it could just be put down to political landscape timing though.

Incidentally, I see in some recent articles the RP are showing us more and more just how much they DON'T agree with the DA :cool:

lexity said:
I don't think the RP's values fall under their strategy... not unless they are made of the same political stuff as the DA, ANC etc. who feel nothing about pandering to the cheapest votes on offer.
Click to expand...
 
lexity said:
Let's not forget that 'clever poker hand' is exactly the strategy employed by the Cape Party/CIP if not since 2007, then since very early on i.e. get the DA below 50% in the WC and then negotiate a referendum.

I don't think the RP's values fall under their strategy... not unless they are made of the same political stuff as the DA, ANC etc. who feel nothing about pandering to the cheapest votes on offer.
Click to expand...
So if the CIP's "clever poker hand" strategy were a royal flush which card would "failing to submit the required documents on time" be?... the queen?
 
It would be great if political parties could stand based mostly on good values and honesty. The fact that they can't just shows how not ready for that the worldwide public is, sadly.


Edit: BTW @lexity , how does your desired system have a representative government if you can't trust or therefore use politics to reach that decision?
 
Brian_G said:
Hardly. They neither had the visible backing needed by far, nor the cheek to suggest they otherwise support the DA.
To a degree it could just be put down to political landscape timing though.
Click to expand...
Read the next bit.... I don't think the RP's values fall under 'strategy'.

Funding is based on their DA policy alignment, audacity to promise to throw their hat in with the DA if they get <100k votes is also to do with their DA policy alignment.

Brian_G said:
Incidentally, I see in some recent articles the RP are showing us more and more just how much they DON'T agree with the DA :cool:
Click to expand...
Just sayin' ... watch out for those Churchill worshipers... Churchill was the man of many centuries on account of his opportunism and love for the Welfare-Warfare State.

Keep that up for long enough and the WEF is going to latch onto you and you will be their top champion before long. I'm hoping his friends and family can keep his feet on the ground, cos I can see it happening. That kinda power does very strange things to human beings. So powerful is the lure that unless you are actively speaking out against it, you are prime capitulation material.
 
lexity said:
Read the next bit.... I don't think the RP's values fall under 'strategy'.

Funding is based on their DA policy alignment, audacity to promise to throw their hat in with the DA if they get <100k votes is also to do with their DA policy alignment.
Click to expand...
A few things tell me (partially) otherwise, but I guess you play with the hand you're dealt with.

No other way to get the DA-kissing public off their knees either way. Certainly a clever outcome.

lexity said:
Just sayin' ... watch out for those Churchill worshipers... Churchill was the man of many centuries on account of his opportunism and love for the Welfare-Warfare State.

Keep that up for long enough and the WEF is going to latch onto you and you will be their top champion before long. I'm hoping his friends and family can keep his feet on the ground, cos I can see it happening. That kinda power does very strange things to human beings. So powerful is the lure that unless you are actively speaking out against it, you are prime capitulation material.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:
 
Brian_G said:
It would be great if political parties could stand based mostly on good values and honesty. The fact that they can't just shows how not ready for that the worldwide public is, sadly.
Click to expand...
I mean "good values" are subjective. I think parties/candidates stand for what they think are good policies. We just do our best to find a party/candidate that most closely aligns with our own vision of "good".

Agree on the honesty thing though. I don't think I've ever met anyone that actually trusts politicians. That is pretty sad and it seems to be a universal thing. They're up there with lawyers and used car salesman on the can-slide-uphill-o-meter.
 
Brian_G said:
It would be great if political parties could stand based mostly on good values and honesty. The fact that they can't just shows how not ready for that the worldwide public is, sadly.


Edit: BTW @lexity , how does your desired system have a representative government if you can't trust or therefore use politics to reach that decision?
Click to expand...
It has been proven beyond doubt that smaller governments, comparing Statist regimes, makes for a more prosperous, flourishing society.

Well, we take that principle as far as possible, and look to take it all the way.

A free market, that is completely open to competition, would appoint leaders in their field. This is the idea of a pure meritocracy.
 
lexity said:
Do you subscribe to the notion of 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'?
Click to expand...
Erm, nope. Doesn't mean that I believe that any form of social welfare is evil though.

Do you subscribe to 'anyone who thinks the CI movement is a complete parody, must be a commie' ?
 
Brian_G said:
www.capeindependent.com

Phil Craig challenges Steenhuisen to polygraph test over referendum promise | The Cape Independent

Recently John Steenhuisen claimed Craig was lying that he promised a referendum on Cape independence. Craig took and passed a polygraph test, and challenged Steenhuisen to join him
www.capeindependent.com www.capeindependent.com
Click to expand...
Even JS isn't stupid enough to agree to such a moronic lose-lose challenge. The separatists are fringe and the DA have nothing to gain but all to lose by agreeing to that. All they need do is ignore it. It is ironic why the ANC never agreed to DA challenges to debate their president, nothing for the ANC to gain.
 
R13... said:
The separatists are fringe and the DA have nothing to gain but all to lose by agreeing to that.
Click to expand...
Depends if you believe the polls or not, carried out by the same company that does the DA's polls for them..

Yet the DA is taking them seriously enough now to be making regular comment in the press about these subjects.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top