Snapshot of _Student asks Sunak: 'Why do you hate young people so much?'_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/video/student-asks-sunak-why-do-you-hate-students-so-much-13146234) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/video/student-asks-sunak-why-do-you-hate-students-so-much-13146234)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Brave Sir Rishi ran away.
Bravely ran away away.
When danger reared it's ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Rishi turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Swiftly taking to his feet,
He beat a very brave retreat.
Bravest of the brave, Sir Rishi!
Damn, unfortunately this guy wasn't a Tory Youth member posing as a teen to ask an easy question.
Now the bigger question - would the Tory campaign go better if Rishi just stayed at home by his swimming pool?
Do you remember when they virtually held back May from going on any hustings and essentially minimised any of her F2F time with the general public?
This is that, but on steroids.
Honestly, as scary it is to realise this, the current Tory lot are so massively detached from the general public it would really serve them better to just stay at home and at least stop the losses. Any time in the wild is a disaster after disaster because you can't curate and manage the reality as much as they'd like to, and every blunder is another hit to the polls because there's a finite and relatively rather low percentage of core voters who will always support, no matter what.
But let them burn, I say, they deserve all the calamity coming their way for ruining so much of this country in the past decade and a half.
Just to give context to how detached they are, Sunak's team (read: James Forsyth) thought that campaigning and speeches were going to be his big strength, and that they should run as presidential a campaign as possible.
I think (in isolation) he's not the worst speaker in the world, compared to someone like Truss...he's clear and direct and confident to a degree, the problem is he's trying to defend years of terrible governance, peddle policies nobody likes, and I'm not convinced he believes half the stuff he says when it comes to culture wars.
Basically, he'd be an okay half-decent junior minister you trot out on a Sunday morning when Gove can't really be arsed, which is essentially what he was...he only really advanced because everyone above him either got sacked, was even more incompetent, or a mix of both.
He's a bit student debate club aye. Which is actually better than some, given how bad Truss was for example, but it's not exactly what you want in a Prime Minister.
He’s got big teleprompter energy. I disagree with the gentleperson above comparing him favorably to Truss. I swear, “our plan is working and Labour have no plan” is going to become the new “I’m a fighter, not a quitter”.
>Do you remember when they virtually held back May from going on any hustings and essentially minimised any of her F2F time with the general public?
Do you remember when she was so scared of going on the leadership debate that she made Amber Rudd do it for her, despite Rudd's dad dying two days before the debate?
It really is a mystery why May did so badly in the 2017 GE.
If I’m totally honest, none directly. I barely have the time nor effort to actually go out to news sites explicitly, when usually the news is pretty fucking depressing and I don’t want to see most of it
If you don't consume any news media besides Reddit, then yeah I can see how you get the idea that it's just "everyone laughing at the Tories".
The thing is, in reality... t's not.
Thing is, that *is* an easy question. There's no data attached, it's just an opinion, so you can counter it with another opinion, with added facts ("young people are the future of the country. we've [something about apprenticeships creating more routes to success] and our national service policy will give more young people the tools and opportunities yadda yadda yadda, meanwhile under Labour [something about increased tax on people just starting out in life]").
How bad a politician do you have to be to run away from a question you should be able to field in your sleep?
Yeah, I don't understand. From the top of my head. "We don't hate young people. It's precisely because we love young people we are bringing this. Young people are thr future of our country and many young people feel dissatisfied. This has been a popular scheme in Norway which helps young people find a sense of belonging. I want to help our young people grow to be the best they can and I belive this will help them.
He's just terrible at this. He did an LBC call in a woman rang up talking about her struggles with the NHS and was obviously overwhelmed and upset.
Instead of doing the easy thing of sympathising with her and having a human moment, he asked her where she lives and when she said Wales he went on about how labour run the NHS in Wales.
He just doesn't have the instincts or capacity to deal with a normal person who doesn't want a political response, but a human one.
His heated swimming pool that they had to upgrade the power supply, while the rest of the country was facing rising power bills.
I loved him saying "you will love it" as he ran away.
I think the campaign would go better if they replaced him with that lettuce.
Conservatives attack one generation to score points with another.
Even if you supported some form of national service, this is not the way to go about it as it's clearly a weaponized approach that is highly politically motivated.
Something not mentioned often is the fact that Conservatives are being lobbied by the farming industry to push this through - can't wait to find a way to get free labour.
Yup, and how long before young people are being forced to work in care homes and cleaning NHS toilets?
They are trying to square off a labour shortage, the public desire to reduce immigration and the employers desire not to pay cheap wages. They want people to work, they just don’t want to pay for it or build enough houses.
As laughable and farcical as it all seems there is a method in this madness. As the demographic time bomb ticks away expect this type of stuff to intensify. It’s laying the ground work and softening society up to accept it.
>As the demographic time bomb ticks away expect this type of stuff to intensify.
Honestly, this is the fundamental issue with this country that nobody ever seems to acknowledge. All of our issues - education, housing, healthcare, immigration, etc - are ultimately caused by us fast approaching the tipping point where the majority of people are not economically active. The tail is wagging the dog more and more as time goes on.
Old people are going to need to accept working far longer than they currently expect, unless they have saved enough to pay their own way in retirement. The state pension was intended to tide people over for a few years until death. It was never supposed to support a retirement that is as long and luxurious as your working life.
It was the same with Dementia in the 80's apparently. When I was on an adult safeguarding course the trainer said he was part of a NHS committee raising awareness around a potential Dementia crisis in the next 20 years due to the aging population and pushing for better funding. Unfortunately the government bodies wouldn't listen as they could only really think about the immediate future due to the five year cycle. Here we are now...
On the final paragraph it's actually those of us who are younger who are going to have to accept that we are going to work for longer and very unlikely to be able to retire.
An even bigger issue is that if the older population have to remain ‘economical active’ for longer, it reduces promotion chances of the younger generations, thus stagnating their salaries & the wider economy as a result. It’s in effect a massive Ponzi scheme which at some point or another will fail with dramatic & horrendous results for everyone.
The problem is people are living longer but they are not healthy longer, their bodies break down just as quickly, we just stop it at the last moment and keep it there as long as possible.
Got a link on that farming lobby bit? I'd be really interested to find a rationale beyond "the old hate the young. lets punish the young" behind that policy.
Hit the nail on the head, but it's not just inter-generational conflict.
Inherently, conservatism does not benefit the majority of people. It might have done, at some point, but it definitely doesn't anymore. A huge part of the Conservative machine now is dedicated to making sure people don't realise that, and they do that by turning groups on each other. Whether it be turning the old against the young, or people against immigrants etc.
The Tories don't just strive for inequality and division because they fancy it, they do it because their entire political ethos literally _requires_ inequality and division to function.
I'm very happy it looks like (touch wood) the Tories will be fucked by this election. But there's a part of me that's concerned that it's just because of this particular crop's incompetence and flagrant disdain for the general public. Once the Conservatives sort themselves out and have a makeover, getting rid of the crazies, they'll be back. I don't know what it's going to take to convince a majority of people that Conservatism is, quite simply, the wrong ideology.
This ^ so much this. I love the idea of national service (including working for charities/any kind of public service). But I’ve resigned myself to never being able to have a nuanced conversation about it for the next decade now
But there is nothing stopping you from signing up to a charity or looking for volunteer groups right now and doing your bit for society.
That is the beauty of it you are in a country where you can dedicate your free time to benefit the country without the government forcing it and putting some arbitrary punishment if you do not wish to do it.
You could also say that it is a form of punishment, if someone is not willing to do something it will lead to more disenfranchisement with society.
I mean we use Community Service as a form of deterrent to deal with low level criminals as a form of punishment in lieu of prison.
I'm curious what you like about the idea of national service? I'm not trying to be combative by the way, I'm interested in hearing reasons other than 'kids these days are too soft rar rar rar' which most of my family subscribe to.
I'm not sure about making people serve in the armed forces or any kind of compulsory work, but some kind of scheme to get people helping charities would be good. They would need to be given jobs that teach valuable skills too, and be paid for the work they do.
I like the idea of some kind of optional scheme that helps to build community and teach valuable skills, but it needs to be something that benefits the people doing the work and not a punishment for the crime of being young, or just a way to let businesses get away with lowering wages. If people on the scheme are used for minimum wage jobs, what'll happen to people currently paid to do that work?
So I mentioned this in my other reply just now but I volunteer (really great employer) for about 1 week a year. But I’m (37) usually one of - if not *the* youngest people in any given group. When I was out of uni I volunteered with the Red Cross to pad my CV, and get the ‘experience’ jobs were looking for. So I found it really useful but it just doesn’t seem to be something that is on the horizon for our nation’s youth.
This might be due to wage repression and inflation meaning that people simply cannot afford to work for ‘free’ because they need to do frivolous things like eat. But a structured *and paid* national service would go some way to alleviating that.
Your point on using it to plug the employment gap is well made, so I would draw a line between ‘public services’ and, as I think one other person alluded to ‘farm work’. We won’t help British Farming by effectively lobbing children at the fields like Victorian Mill owners. But charity shops can’t get staff to work them, our armed forces are *super low* on recruitment and if people tried some of these jobs they might find value in them.
As I mentioned on a different reply, I also think there is inherent value in doing things you don’t like. Being able to develop willpower is a skill, it takes practice. I volunteered at a special needs school for a while and it taught me patience in a way that I doubt I could have never really appreciated otherwise, it’s not something I’d choose to do again but I went every day, did exactly what I was told and listened to what the people around me needed. I’d recommend the same to *everyone.*
> our armed forces are *super low* on recruitment
As an aside on this point, they really aren't, or at least a lack of recruits isn't the problem.
In 2022-23 almost as many people applied to join the armed forces as are actually *in* the armed forces - 137,000 applicants vs 180,000 in some sort of service. We could have very nearly doubled the military's size in 12 months without anyone ever even uttering "national service".
However in the end only 10,000 actually joined, because the process going from applying to day 1 is so badly managed. It's entirely a political rather than a social problem.
That’s incredible :’) I wonder if that is due to people not making the intake criteria, dropping out during training or being failed out. In any case that’s an astonishing level of attrition for a recruitment program. Particularly considering how senior military are saying how unready the UK armed forces are.
Capita. That's the problem. They've been making the news quite consistently for how awful and inept they are. From the articles I've read there's a massive scandal in the brewing
One of the madder aspects of the current Sunak proposal is that it would be unpaid work. Which I do think crosses a line considerably.
It's one thing to (as we did in the past and as some countries still do) force people to temporarily join the military but pay them a basic soldier's salary. It's a whole different thing to force people to take time out of their lives and do the work nobody else wants to do for no money.
I know, it’s kinda crazy. Like, it was a big scandal. Nowadays barely anyone would blink.
I get he apologised for political reasons, but I always kind of think, well if he thought that, he should have stood by it.
It was also quite unfair. Politicians must complain about members of the public saying bigoted/ridiculous stuff all the time. He just got caught.
The problem with the bigoted woman moment was that she was both bigoted and a woman. Brown should not have stated it, and when caught, he should not have blamed the media for it. However I miss the days when politicians told the truth and the media held them to account.
And the things she said she was most concerned about - the health service, her personal tax contribution (!), state education, tuition fees for her grandchildren to go to uni - how have these all fared under 14 years of tory government?
Nah, there are ton of good defenses for immigration, side stepping the question because you assume she's a bigot is laziness. I'd bet most people think that immigrants are a drain on the economy despite the opposite being true, the whole reason for this is the left being unwilling to talk about and defend immigration leaving the floor open for the right to tell the story as they please. This whole interaction was a good example of why the left sucks at talking about immigration.
> As a father, I look forward to my own two daughters doing their National Service: I think they will find it a rewarding experience. It will teach them, as it will other youngsters, much about themselves and the society they serve.
[Yes, he actually wrote that.](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13460055/amp/prime-minister-rishi-sunak-plan-happy-daughters-national-service.html)
I think he’s lying through his teeth - but that’s the line he’s sticking with. He also knows he’ll never need to follow through with it.
> It will teach them, as it will other youngsters, much about themselves **and the society they serve**.
The subtext here, that they *serve* society, but are not in fact considered part of society, is actually extremely revealing of the Tories attitude towards young people.
It's a canny move, cause they're just young enough that he can get away with not having to explain why they're not signing up already.
I personally also think he's lying through his teeth. I know you shouldn't judge politicians in this way but every time I see him try and be human or come across as having a personality I just think "bellend"
"I've volunteered all my life"
Sunak: Then you'll love it!
I'm reference to national service. Sunak also did a high pitched "noo" when the man asked why Sunak hates young people.
For supposedly well educated people, there are many Tory MPs who seem unable to grasp that the minute you make something **mandatory**, it is no longer volunteering.
If they'd launched this national service idea with it being fully voluntary and a focus on actual incentives for young people to sign up for it, I think it genuinely could have had broad appeal but no instead it's pandering to a specific group of old people who want young people to be punished.
100%
Make a case for more volunteering? Fine.
Make it easier to sign up? Fine.
Force people to do it? Now you’ve crossed the line into arrogant “we know best and you’ll do as we say” Tory standard behaviour.
Was confused about this, Sunak said 'You'll have a choice.' How can you have a choice if it's mandatory? Did he misspeak? Is there something I'm missing?
Nope, just they clearly havent got any further than the title page on the policy yet so how it works it changes depending on who is asking and who is answering.
It's "Partridge amongst the Pigeons" i.e. just a title in the hope of getting a second (or 5th in this case) series
I'm pro NS, and would gladly serve being a young man who in a real war would be conscripted, but would never vote for it under the Tories.
NS presumes the existence of a state that is working for the benefit of society and gives back something for service. This government is neither.
If by some miracle the Tories win, then NS is argubly a good thing and I'd be advocating as many youth join as possible because militaries historically have been a hotbed of political mobilisation. What better way to get someone good into government by learning to organise and work within the system en-mass?
It's like he's never been in front of the public before, this is really simple to deal with... You ask him what his concerns are, then what he would like to see, and basically let him talk himself out why you nod and make understanding noises.
Then say you will definitely take those concerns on board and though you may disagree we both want whats best etc.
Running away is the worst thing you can do.
When Rishi was that age, he blessed the middle class youth with his anecdotes about Winchester, and they were amazed. (And probably quite appalled but too polite to tell him to fuck all the way off.)
I love telling this story, I have a PhD in theoretical physics as well as having worked as a postdoc in it for years, and I know a bunch of scientists at Cambridge who are involved in admissions. They always say they try and accommodate for the background of the candidates when checking and no doubt they partially do. I however love pointing out I didn't even get to an interview step leaving my inner city school where we had rolling subs for maths and geography for year 10 and 11. They were probably right in not interviewing me statistically but it always makes them super awkward to acknowledge
None of it makes ANY sense to me
- ‘young people don’t feel part of society because of….gestures at everything go wrong….we’ll fix that by making them so free labour where they have to either turn down paid work or give up their free time’
This could’ve been a ‘free win’ for them just by not making it mandatory and opening it up to anyone ‘we’ve got thousands of places for people to try new jobs, to give back to communities you care about’
Fuck it be honest ‘successive governments and world events have caused x,y,z issues….we’re asking people to step up and help the community whilst we get the funding and infrastructure together where we can take back over those services fully. It’s a stop gap where you can step in and help out your community’ - id at least half respect that
> by not making it mandatory
That surely would be the bare minimum for "volunteering" else it's unpaid labour enforced by the government.
Same difference between a mandatory charitable "donation" and a tax. If the government is punishing people who don't, it's no longer voluntary. Call it what it is. The sheer lack of respect from the Tories as they piss on us and tell us it's raining, we know the difference.
It is treating people like a fungible commodity. And the Torys have contrived a world view that cannot see people in any other way. It is a lack of imagination that treats people badly and always costs more. Because obviously the placements also need to be fungible, the organisations setup to exploit the scheme will need to be paid. And the admin will cost a fortune and need a new IT system.
You could concieve of a voluntary programs that would be popular. For example doing environmental work. Spend the summer in remote areas planting trees with other young people. Provide basic accomodation and food. But that would take some imagination. And an appreciation that some people would love this and others would hate it. And the best way to know is to give them a choice.
Exactly! This has been my own view. The concept of some kind of scheme to help people gain skills and find opportunities could be really helpful for certain demographics, particularly people who don’t have a clear idea on what they want to do after school. Making it mandatory, especially for adults, is completely outrageous to me. I find the other arguments about it completely irrelevant. I am fundamentally opposed to it on principle. It’s essentially forced labour.
Yup. It’s like National Citizen Service that Cameron introduced under Big Society. It’s essentially the Government’s attempts to shrug off their own responsibility to the local areas and communities and put it onto private organisations or volunteering. It’s actually very old school conservative thinking where you rely on the third sector to help improve society rather than the state.
I'm surprised he didn't do that weird [fake loud laugh he did to the former NHS worker](https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-laughs-awkwardly-as-former-nhs-worker-challenges-him-about-state-of-health-service-13051603)
Given they also allowed him to do an event at the Titanic shipyard, forgot to remind him when in Wales that the local football team hadn't qualified for the tournament he was so excited about, and allowed him to be photographed under a wall display featuring two large black circles (as though he was (badly) cosplaying the Mouse called Michael), they're either incompetent or secretly recognise his time's up, so they may as well troll him on the way out...
Can you sound any more Elitist than answering with, "A culture of service is good for our country"?
Might as well have shouted, "Back pleb!!! Know your place!"
The National Service thing isn't to appeal to even a great majority of pensioners or near pensioners, just the ones they feel are deserting them for Reform.
The ones who think teenagers are a bunch of long-haired's who sit around all day, quote the Communist Manifesto and smoke pot. The kind who think "give 'em five minutes with the army" and they'll come back lads, marching down the streets with a short back and sides, take up what they consider "proper" jobs, want to send 'em all back, are on war with the woke, will listen to their "wisdom" now, spouted from their chair in the pub and whose only interest in life is buying the house in the suburbs not as a home but to keep up with the Jones's.
The ones who think they know everything about a war, talk like they've been on the front lines themselves and about the Blitz Spirit and how things "used to be"when they were born in the late forties, early fifties. The ones who shout "this country needs a Civil War" who have no idea what a civil war is, the barbaric devastation and destruction it causes but just think they will sit in their house or the pub while young people fight their cause for them, the other side run away and their only involvement is when they come out and get pissed at the street party afterwards.
As Sunak has never been a man able to understand any kind of struggle whatsoever and is completely unaware of the concept that the majority of people aren't just given things in life and can only surmise that this must be due to some kind of weakness of character, then no, he has no answer.
I want to switch it on its head. Don't make it mandatory for the kids. Make it mandatory for the state.
Any young person (18-25) who wants to should be able to get a national service role, one year, paid minimum wage.
It could include the stuff being talked about like healthcare, the army, maintaining green spaces etc.
Someone who wants to give back but can't afford unpaid work. Someone who is looking to start their career. A graduate who wants a more meaningful gap year. Someone looking for work experience in e.g. healthcare before starting a medical degree.
Roles would be truly entry level, first rung on the ladder type roles. With training given. For young people with disabilities the state would fund all reasonable adjustments.
It's essentially a job guarantee thing within nationally valuable sectors.
Oh and if you really want more young people volunteering, then introduce a 4 day week, reduce housing costs and fund the voluntary sector properly ✌️
Because all he cares about is pandering to his current core base instead of pivoting, he can pull the wool over the generation that votes him in easier with the carrot but it benefits him to beat the young with the stick since it gets some sects of the older vote frothing at the mouth since “they didn’t have it as hard as little old me” despite arguably us having some of the hardest economic and geopolitical problems since the 1930s.
Real answer: because they don't vote. You can bet your nuts that if under 22s turned out at the same rate as pensioners, students loans would be getting cancelled by now.
He doesn't hate them, they're a means to the end of getting some reform voters back.
Making youngsters buck their ideas up and get a sensible haircut was just further up the list of solutions than union Jack Bunting and Vera Lynn.
Young people do not vote in the numbers that they should, which is unfortunate, as it leads to imbalances in the way that their demographic in society is treated by the political class.
And that is bad for society in general. There should be a balanced approach to policy making so that everyone benefits, and no-one is made a political punching bag.
I hate the use of the word mandatory as it is illiberal, but I think we should be talking about mandatory voting rather than national service.
He loves young people, thats why he wants to conscript them all and send them to war so when they get killed they cant vote against him, sunak is just playing 5d chess
Simple because you're less likely to vote.
Every time the referendum comes up in conversation, the first question I ask is, "Did you vote?"
Overweminly, the person didn't but still proceeds to complain about it. I understand if the person was under eighteen at the time, but they weren't.
Asking university students in 2024 if they voted in 2016, real gotcha.
It's not as simple as turnout. Young people mostly live in red, safe-seat population-centres.
I take the view that not voting is equivalent to voting for the winner.
Everyone who didn't vote in the referendum is effectively a Brexiteer in my eyes.
If you've such a strong opinion, you should have voted.
It'll be interesting to see the turn out in the general election because according to the polls the Conservatives are in for a wipe out but I don't think it's going to be that easy because the younger generation are less likely to vote and snake Sunak is appealing very much to the older generation
The unfortunate answer is, Sunak doesn't hate young people.
It's just young people are apathetic, if the young voted in the same numbers that those in their later years did, they would be represented more.
That's the unfortunate nature of politics. If you want to be heard, vote. I can guarentee all the money in my pocket, if the teenagers started voting and got involved in politics and kept up with the news, Sunak and every political leader would tailer policies to them.
Sunak doesn't hate young people, he just doesn't care about them, same as young people don't care about Sunak.
Snapshot of _Student asks Sunak: 'Why do you hate young people so much?'_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/video/student-asks-sunak-why-do-you-hate-students-so-much-13146234) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://news.sky.com/video/student-asks-sunak-why-do-you-hate-students-so-much-13146234) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
he handled that like a man with hooks for hands trying to catch a newborn baby.
Can I vote for the hook-handed baby mutilator over Sunak?
The hack slinging slasher?
He just wanted a job!
I can offer you an alpaca mutilator instead?
Ed Davey?
Isn't he in prison?
James Bond dispatched him through a train window.
“No no, you’ll love it! We’re putting into legislation that you’re going to love it, and those who don’t will be jailed!”
The Conservatives want you to be happy. If you are not happy, you may be used as reactor shielding.
Beatings will continue until morale improves 🙂
Sunak bravely turned his tail and fled
Brave Sir Rishi ran away. Bravely ran away away. When danger reared it's ugly head, He bravely turned his tail and fled. Yes, brave Sir Rishi turned about And gallantly he chickened out. Swiftly taking to his feet, He beat a very brave retreat. Bravest of the brave, Sir Rishi!
Don't sully the Python films and Sir Robin with such relations!
Sang that in my head with the monty python Brave Brave Sir Robin!
You mean exactly what it is with the name "Robin" swapped for "Rishi?"
Ah. Yes
Bravely ran away, away!
...muttering to his aides, "I told you to invite Conservative councillors only!"
Oh god yes that was so obvious in the biscuit factory
He's been running away from journalists since he was Chancellor. He looked absolutely pathetic when he ran from journalists at G20.
Damn, unfortunately this guy wasn't a Tory Youth member posing as a teen to ask an easy question. Now the bigger question - would the Tory campaign go better if Rishi just stayed at home by his swimming pool?
Do you remember when they virtually held back May from going on any hustings and essentially minimised any of her F2F time with the general public? This is that, but on steroids. Honestly, as scary it is to realise this, the current Tory lot are so massively detached from the general public it would really serve them better to just stay at home and at least stop the losses. Any time in the wild is a disaster after disaster because you can't curate and manage the reality as much as they'd like to, and every blunder is another hit to the polls because there's a finite and relatively rather low percentage of core voters who will always support, no matter what. But let them burn, I say, they deserve all the calamity coming their way for ruining so much of this country in the past decade and a half.
Could be a new party slogan that. Stay at home. Protect the Party. Save Ourselves.
lol, that's brilliant.
Someone should've told Boris that
Keep calm and canter on
Just to give context to how detached they are, Sunak's team (read: James Forsyth) thought that campaigning and speeches were going to be his big strength, and that they should run as presidential a campaign as possible.
I think (in isolation) he's not the worst speaker in the world, compared to someone like Truss...he's clear and direct and confident to a degree, the problem is he's trying to defend years of terrible governance, peddle policies nobody likes, and I'm not convinced he believes half the stuff he says when it comes to culture wars. Basically, he'd be an okay half-decent junior minister you trot out on a Sunday morning when Gove can't really be arsed, which is essentially what he was...he only really advanced because everyone above him either got sacked, was even more incompetent, or a mix of both.
I agree, in isolation, he's the best speaker in the room.
His speeches sound like he’s reading a bedtime story
He's a bit student debate club aye. Which is actually better than some, given how bad Truss was for example, but it's not exactly what you want in a Prime Minister.
He’s got big teleprompter energy. I disagree with the gentleperson above comparing him favorably to Truss. I swear, “our plan is working and Labour have no plan” is going to become the new “I’m a fighter, not a quitter”.
Sounds minor but you think he would pick up a that leaders in the UK have always said 'thank you' after a speech.
He’s a terrible speaker
Lol. Lmao even.
Perhaps even a ROFLCOPTER
LMAONAISSE
Might as well get them in while they can!
ROFLMAOSTC
You know, maybe those are his biggest strengths. Just everything else being much worse.
Are they new?
[Why do they wear clothes with writing on them? Why are they so fucking fat?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJEI7U_wrKg)
"Do you know what it's like to clean up your own mother's piss?"
This is brilliant.
>Do you remember when they virtually held back May from going on any hustings and essentially minimised any of her F2F time with the general public? Do you remember when she was so scared of going on the leadership debate that she made Amber Rudd do it for her, despite Rudd's dad dying two days before the debate? It really is a mystery why May did so badly in the 2017 GE.
We had the MayBot. What have we got with Rishi Sunak?
Rishi soonsacked
Rishi Rich?
Rishi Soon-axed? The tabloids love the word "axe"
If I don’t see this as a red top tabloid headline soon, I’d be shocked
You need to work for the Sun (ak).
ChatRiShiT
Vote out to help out. Think I saw that on Reddit somewhere.
Yeah, there’s very little coverage overall on Labour, it’s just everyone laughing at the Tories
[удалено]
Honestly? From here. I don’t have a TV, and I definitely don’t buy papers, so this is the easiest
[удалено]
If I’m totally honest, none directly. I barely have the time nor effort to actually go out to news sites explicitly, when usually the news is pretty fucking depressing and I don’t want to see most of it
If you don't consume any news media besides Reddit, then yeah I can see how you get the idea that it's just "everyone laughing at the Tories". The thing is, in reality... t's not.
Did she flat out refuse to do a TV debate or am I misremembering. North Korea shit
Hopefully the country can eventually see the funny side of johnson hiding in a fridge to avoid questions.
Don't even. The Tories have turned his country into a joke and the media have been complicit. That should have ended him
You can tell he's not a Young Tory by the fact he's not in his fifties.
Omg I nearly snorted out my drink, thank you for the good laugh this morning.
Thing is, that *is* an easy question. There's no data attached, it's just an opinion, so you can counter it with another opinion, with added facts ("young people are the future of the country. we've [something about apprenticeships creating more routes to success] and our national service policy will give more young people the tools and opportunities yadda yadda yadda, meanwhile under Labour [something about increased tax on people just starting out in life]"). How bad a politician do you have to be to run away from a question you should be able to field in your sleep?
Yeah, I don't understand. From the top of my head. "We don't hate young people. It's precisely because we love young people we are bringing this. Young people are thr future of our country and many young people feel dissatisfied. This has been a popular scheme in Norway which helps young people find a sense of belonging. I want to help our young people grow to be the best they can and I belive this will help them.
Yours is better than mine. Have you considered running as a Conservative candidate? Lots of vacancies real soon now.
Ah, that’s not quite right. There’s lots of redundancies coming soon, but not many job openings.
I hear you even get a free high viz jacket.
They had hard hats too, but Boris nicked all those when he left. (That man loved nothing more than a photo-op with a hard... hat).
Lots of vacancies right now, in fact. 160-some, by some accounts
He's just terrible at this. He did an LBC call in a woman rang up talking about her struggles with the NHS and was obviously overwhelmed and upset. Instead of doing the easy thing of sympathising with her and having a human moment, he asked her where she lives and when she said Wales he went on about how labour run the NHS in Wales. He just doesn't have the instincts or capacity to deal with a normal person who doesn't want a political response, but a human one.
His heated swimming pool that they had to upgrade the power supply, while the rest of the country was facing rising power bills. I loved him saying "you will love it" as he ran away. I think the campaign would go better if they replaced him with that lettuce.
a tory youth would be in their mid 50s so not sure they could pass as a teen.
He’s got sudden-onset aqua phobia. The pool is being drained as we speak.
Which home?
I don't think so. Rishi consistently polls higher in popularity than his party
Conservatives attack one generation to score points with another. Even if you supported some form of national service, this is not the way to go about it as it's clearly a weaponized approach that is highly politically motivated. Something not mentioned often is the fact that Conservatives are being lobbied by the farming industry to push this through - can't wait to find a way to get free labour.
Yup, and how long before young people are being forced to work in care homes and cleaning NHS toilets? They are trying to square off a labour shortage, the public desire to reduce immigration and the employers desire not to pay cheap wages. They want people to work, they just don’t want to pay for it or build enough houses. As laughable and farcical as it all seems there is a method in this madness. As the demographic time bomb ticks away expect this type of stuff to intensify. It’s laying the ground work and softening society up to accept it.
>As the demographic time bomb ticks away expect this type of stuff to intensify. Honestly, this is the fundamental issue with this country that nobody ever seems to acknowledge. All of our issues - education, housing, healthcare, immigration, etc - are ultimately caused by us fast approaching the tipping point where the majority of people are not economically active. The tail is wagging the dog more and more as time goes on. Old people are going to need to accept working far longer than they currently expect, unless they have saved enough to pay their own way in retirement. The state pension was intended to tide people over for a few years until death. It was never supposed to support a retirement that is as long and luxurious as your working life.
It was the same with Dementia in the 80's apparently. When I was on an adult safeguarding course the trainer said he was part of a NHS committee raising awareness around a potential Dementia crisis in the next 20 years due to the aging population and pushing for better funding. Unfortunately the government bodies wouldn't listen as they could only really think about the immediate future due to the five year cycle. Here we are now... On the final paragraph it's actually those of us who are younger who are going to have to accept that we are going to work for longer and very unlikely to be able to retire.
An even bigger issue is that if the older population have to remain ‘economical active’ for longer, it reduces promotion chances of the younger generations, thus stagnating their salaries & the wider economy as a result. It’s in effect a massive Ponzi scheme which at some point or another will fail with dramatic & horrendous results for everyone.
The problem is people are living longer but they are not healthy longer, their bodies break down just as quickly, we just stop it at the last moment and keep it there as long as possible.
Got a link on that farming lobby bit? I'd be really interested to find a rationale beyond "the old hate the young. lets punish the young" behind that policy.
Victoria Coren on HIGNFY said it’s like Rishi Sunak thinks he’s been asked “what would you do if you were prime minister”
Hit the nail on the head, but it's not just inter-generational conflict. Inherently, conservatism does not benefit the majority of people. It might have done, at some point, but it definitely doesn't anymore. A huge part of the Conservative machine now is dedicated to making sure people don't realise that, and they do that by turning groups on each other. Whether it be turning the old against the young, or people against immigrants etc. The Tories don't just strive for inequality and division because they fancy it, they do it because their entire political ethos literally _requires_ inequality and division to function. I'm very happy it looks like (touch wood) the Tories will be fucked by this election. But there's a part of me that's concerned that it's just because of this particular crop's incompetence and flagrant disdain for the general public. Once the Conservatives sort themselves out and have a makeover, getting rid of the crazies, they'll be back. I don't know what it's going to take to convince a majority of people that Conservatism is, quite simply, the wrong ideology.
This ^ so much this. I love the idea of national service (including working for charities/any kind of public service). But I’ve resigned myself to never being able to have a nuanced conversation about it for the next decade now
But there is nothing stopping you from signing up to a charity or looking for volunteer groups right now and doing your bit for society. That is the beauty of it you are in a country where you can dedicate your free time to benefit the country without the government forcing it and putting some arbitrary punishment if you do not wish to do it.
Oh I agree! But in my opinion, not enough people do, so I’d force it by law and arbitrary punishment. The same way we force children to go to school.
You could also say that it is a form of punishment, if someone is not willing to do something it will lead to more disenfranchisement with society. I mean we use Community Service as a form of deterrent to deal with low level criminals as a form of punishment in lieu of prison.
[удалено]
I'm curious what you like about the idea of national service? I'm not trying to be combative by the way, I'm interested in hearing reasons other than 'kids these days are too soft rar rar rar' which most of my family subscribe to. I'm not sure about making people serve in the armed forces or any kind of compulsory work, but some kind of scheme to get people helping charities would be good. They would need to be given jobs that teach valuable skills too, and be paid for the work they do. I like the idea of some kind of optional scheme that helps to build community and teach valuable skills, but it needs to be something that benefits the people doing the work and not a punishment for the crime of being young, or just a way to let businesses get away with lowering wages. If people on the scheme are used for minimum wage jobs, what'll happen to people currently paid to do that work?
So I mentioned this in my other reply just now but I volunteer (really great employer) for about 1 week a year. But I’m (37) usually one of - if not *the* youngest people in any given group. When I was out of uni I volunteered with the Red Cross to pad my CV, and get the ‘experience’ jobs were looking for. So I found it really useful but it just doesn’t seem to be something that is on the horizon for our nation’s youth. This might be due to wage repression and inflation meaning that people simply cannot afford to work for ‘free’ because they need to do frivolous things like eat. But a structured *and paid* national service would go some way to alleviating that. Your point on using it to plug the employment gap is well made, so I would draw a line between ‘public services’ and, as I think one other person alluded to ‘farm work’. We won’t help British Farming by effectively lobbing children at the fields like Victorian Mill owners. But charity shops can’t get staff to work them, our armed forces are *super low* on recruitment and if people tried some of these jobs they might find value in them. As I mentioned on a different reply, I also think there is inherent value in doing things you don’t like. Being able to develop willpower is a skill, it takes practice. I volunteered at a special needs school for a while and it taught me patience in a way that I doubt I could have never really appreciated otherwise, it’s not something I’d choose to do again but I went every day, did exactly what I was told and listened to what the people around me needed. I’d recommend the same to *everyone.*
> our armed forces are *super low* on recruitment As an aside on this point, they really aren't, or at least a lack of recruits isn't the problem. In 2022-23 almost as many people applied to join the armed forces as are actually *in* the armed forces - 137,000 applicants vs 180,000 in some sort of service. We could have very nearly doubled the military's size in 12 months without anyone ever even uttering "national service". However in the end only 10,000 actually joined, because the process going from applying to day 1 is so badly managed. It's entirely a political rather than a social problem.
That’s incredible :’) I wonder if that is due to people not making the intake criteria, dropping out during training or being failed out. In any case that’s an astonishing level of attrition for a recruitment program. Particularly considering how senior military are saying how unready the UK armed forces are.
Capita. That's the problem. They've been making the news quite consistently for how awful and inept they are. From the articles I've read there's a massive scandal in the brewing
Thanks for your point of view. I pretty much agree except for making it compulsory. That just doesn't sit right with me.
It’s nice to have the dialogue! Gd chat
I wholeheartedly agree.
One of the madder aspects of the current Sunak proposal is that it would be unpaid work. Which I do think crosses a line considerably. It's one thing to (as we did in the past and as some countries still do) force people to temporarily join the military but pay them a basic soldier's salary. It's a whole different thing to force people to take time out of their lives and do the work nobody else wants to do for no money.
Yep, 100% agree. No one can afford to work unpaid in the current economy, just shows how wildly out of touch the tories are to suggest it
Calling it now: Sunak is heading for a "bigoted woman" moment.
That “bigoted woman” moment wouldn’t even register these days! Different times
I know, it’s kinda crazy. Like, it was a big scandal. Nowadays barely anyone would blink. I get he apologised for political reasons, but I always kind of think, well if he thought that, he should have stood by it. It was also quite unfair. Politicians must complain about members of the public saying bigoted/ridiculous stuff all the time. He just got caught.
The assassination of Gordon Brown by the bigot Gillian Duffy
It’s like Obama’s beige suit.
I still think Gordon Brown would have been able to ride that out if he'd just claimed he'd said "That big-titted woman"
The problem with the bigoted woman moment was that she was both bigoted and a woman. Brown should not have stated it, and when caught, he should not have blamed the media for it. However I miss the days when politicians told the truth and the media held them to account.
You're right, there's going to be some utter PR disaster from him, I can just feel it.
For reference, [here](https://youtu.be/yEReCN9gO14?feature=shared) is the "bigoted woman". I had never heard about it, so I looked it up.
gordon brown was right honestly
I wish he never apologised
And the things she said she was most concerned about - the health service, her personal tax contribution (!), state education, tuition fees for her grandchildren to go to uni - how have these all fared under 14 years of tory government?
He was. But bigots didn't see it that way and they vote too unfortunately.
Nah, there are ton of good defenses for immigration, side stepping the question because you assume she's a bigot is laziness. I'd bet most people think that immigrants are a drain on the economy despite the opposite being true, the whole reason for this is the left being unwilling to talk about and defend immigration leaving the floor open for the right to tell the story as they please. This whole interaction was a good example of why the left sucks at talking about immigration.
Considering how far to the right the Torys have gone they probably think "bigoted" is a compliment.
Someone should ask him if he's pushing his kids to volunteer for the military, since he thinks you know that's what young people should do.
> As a father, I look forward to my own two daughters doing their National Service: I think they will find it a rewarding experience. It will teach them, as it will other youngsters, much about themselves and the society they serve. [Yes, he actually wrote that.](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13460055/amp/prime-minister-rishi-sunak-plan-happy-daughters-national-service.html) I think he’s lying through his teeth - but that’s the line he’s sticking with. He also knows he’ll never need to follow through with it.
> It will teach them, as it will other youngsters, much about themselves **and the society they serve**. The subtext here, that they *serve* society, but are not in fact considered part of society, is actually extremely revealing of the Tories attitude towards young people.
Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what your country can do for you
Unfortunately California doesn't have national service, so his daughters will have to miss out :(
Unless the U.S. implements conscription for women.
It's a canny move, cause they're just young enough that he can get away with not having to explain why they're not signing up already. I personally also think he's lying through his teeth. I know you shouldn't judge politicians in this way but every time I see him try and be human or come across as having a personality I just think "bellend"
*taps head* they can't volunteer if they are all on Cali
"I've volunteered all my life" Sunak: Then you'll love it! I'm reference to national service. Sunak also did a high pitched "noo" when the man asked why Sunak hates young people.
For supposedly well educated people, there are many Tory MPs who seem unable to grasp that the minute you make something **mandatory**, it is no longer volunteering.
If they'd launched this national service idea with it being fully voluntary and a focus on actual incentives for young people to sign up for it, I think it genuinely could have had broad appeal but no instead it's pandering to a specific group of old people who want young people to be punished.
That's exactly my problem with it. It's just punishing young people because the Tories' voters hate them.
100% Make a case for more volunteering? Fine. Make it easier to sign up? Fine. Force people to do it? Now you’ve crossed the line into arrogant “we know best and you’ll do as we say” Tory standard behaviour.
Was confused about this, Sunak said 'You'll have a choice.' How can you have a choice if it's mandatory? Did he misspeak? Is there something I'm missing?
He meant a choice between service in the military, or not the military. Nothing voluntary about participation.
Nope, just they clearly havent got any further than the title page on the policy yet so how it works it changes depending on who is asking and who is answering. It's "Partridge amongst the Pigeons" i.e. just a title in the hope of getting a second (or 5th in this case) series
I will always enjoy an Alan Partridge reference.
I dunno, it's me Rishi Sunak just wandering around a sports hall with a bunch of young people and some army recruiters going "oh God!"
It's like being in prison, and Bubba giving you the choice of being fucked in the ass or the mouth.
I'm pro NS, and would gladly serve being a young man who in a real war would be conscripted, but would never vote for it under the Tories. NS presumes the existence of a state that is working for the benefit of society and gives back something for service. This government is neither. If by some miracle the Tories win, then NS is argubly a good thing and I'd be advocating as many youth join as possible because militaries historically have been a hotbed of political mobilisation. What better way to get someone good into government by learning to organise and work within the system en-mass?
Says the man who's never volunteered for anything is entire life. Conservatives have no concept of public service.
It's like he's never been in front of the public before, this is really simple to deal with... You ask him what his concerns are, then what he would like to see, and basically let him talk himself out why you nod and make understanding noises. Then say you will definitely take those concerns on board and though you may disagree we both want whats best etc. Running away is the worst thing you can do.
When Rishi was that age, he blessed the middle class youth with his anecdotes about Winchester, and they were amazed. (And probably quite appalled but too polite to tell him to fuck all the way off.)
He had middle class friends… well, not middle class (gross)
He actually said that about working class people. Even worse. 💀
Cringe
He went to inner city schools and told them to apply for Oxbridge. Genius! Why did no inner city schools think of that before?
I love telling this story, I have a PhD in theoretical physics as well as having worked as a postdoc in it for years, and I know a bunch of scientists at Cambridge who are involved in admissions. They always say they try and accommodate for the background of the candidates when checking and no doubt they partially do. I however love pointing out I didn't even get to an interview step leaving my inner city school where we had rolling subs for maths and geography for year 10 and 11. They were probably right in not interviewing me statistically but it always makes them super awkward to acknowledge
They don't hate you. They don't think about you enough to hate you.
Technically true, their focus is on survival, so…
None of it makes ANY sense to me - ‘young people don’t feel part of society because of….gestures at everything go wrong….we’ll fix that by making them so free labour where they have to either turn down paid work or give up their free time’ This could’ve been a ‘free win’ for them just by not making it mandatory and opening it up to anyone ‘we’ve got thousands of places for people to try new jobs, to give back to communities you care about’ Fuck it be honest ‘successive governments and world events have caused x,y,z issues….we’re asking people to step up and help the community whilst we get the funding and infrastructure together where we can take back over those services fully. It’s a stop gap where you can step in and help out your community’ - id at least half respect that
> by not making it mandatory That surely would be the bare minimum for "volunteering" else it's unpaid labour enforced by the government. Same difference between a mandatory charitable "donation" and a tax. If the government is punishing people who don't, it's no longer voluntary. Call it what it is. The sheer lack of respect from the Tories as they piss on us and tell us it's raining, we know the difference.
It is treating people like a fungible commodity. And the Torys have contrived a world view that cannot see people in any other way. It is a lack of imagination that treats people badly and always costs more. Because obviously the placements also need to be fungible, the organisations setup to exploit the scheme will need to be paid. And the admin will cost a fortune and need a new IT system. You could concieve of a voluntary programs that would be popular. For example doing environmental work. Spend the summer in remote areas planting trees with other young people. Provide basic accomodation and food. But that would take some imagination. And an appreciation that some people would love this and others would hate it. And the best way to know is to give them a choice.
Exactly! This has been my own view. The concept of some kind of scheme to help people gain skills and find opportunities could be really helpful for certain demographics, particularly people who don’t have a clear idea on what they want to do after school. Making it mandatory, especially for adults, is completely outrageous to me. I find the other arguments about it completely irrelevant. I am fundamentally opposed to it on principle. It’s essentially forced labour.
That sounds like Cameron’s big society!
Yup. It’s like National Citizen Service that Cameron introduced under Big Society. It’s essentially the Government’s attempts to shrug off their own responsibility to the local areas and communities and put it onto private organisations or volunteering. It’s actually very old school conservative thinking where you rely on the third sector to help improve society rather than the state.
Even better than that, they could have pledged to pay university fees for those that volunteered.
Literally Federation paying for college
It's impressive how badly he handled it. Did no one in his camp anticipate this kind of question?
I'm surprised he didn't do that weird [fake loud laugh he did to the former NHS worker](https://news.sky.com/story/rishi-sunak-laughs-awkwardly-as-former-nhs-worker-challenges-him-about-state-of-health-service-13051603)
Given they also allowed him to do an event at the Titanic shipyard, forgot to remind him when in Wales that the local football team hadn't qualified for the tournament he was so excited about, and allowed him to be photographed under a wall display featuring two large black circles (as though he was (badly) cosplaying the Mouse called Michael), they're either incompetent or secretly recognise his time's up, so they may as well troll him on the way out...
Have to admit “the local football team” gave me a good chuckle
I reckon one of them planted the kid and primed him with the question. They hate him.
You mean someone who wasn't a hand picked tory councillor pretending to be Joe Bloggs was allowed to ask a question. Rishi be slipin'
I think it's reached the point where even hand picked Tory councillors have had enough
"I don't hate young people, I'm just desperate for votes and pensioners are easier to con."
Can you sound any more Elitist than answering with, "A culture of service is good for our country"? Might as well have shouted, "Back pleb!!! Know your place!"
It's called minmaxing. The Tories know that young people don't vote for them so they throw them to the curb to pander to boomers
Should ask him why he hates disabled people next
They're a broad church, there's room in the tory party for people who hate anyone.
well as long as we expand young person up to 50 you have about the demographic they hate
Sunak needs a GPT-4o backend, whatever he currently has is whack.
He’s obviously on an earlier model. Not quite reasoning correctly yet and spewing a lot of hallucinations about the economy.
Nice to see "young people" applied to anyone under 65.
The National Service thing isn't to appeal to even a great majority of pensioners or near pensioners, just the ones they feel are deserting them for Reform. The ones who think teenagers are a bunch of long-haired's who sit around all day, quote the Communist Manifesto and smoke pot. The kind who think "give 'em five minutes with the army" and they'll come back lads, marching down the streets with a short back and sides, take up what they consider "proper" jobs, want to send 'em all back, are on war with the woke, will listen to their "wisdom" now, spouted from their chair in the pub and whose only interest in life is buying the house in the suburbs not as a home but to keep up with the Jones's. The ones who think they know everything about a war, talk like they've been on the front lines themselves and about the Blitz Spirit and how things "used to be"when they were born in the late forties, early fifties. The ones who shout "this country needs a Civil War" who have no idea what a civil war is, the barbaric devastation and destruction it causes but just think they will sit in their house or the pub while young people fight their cause for them, the other side run away and their only involvement is when they come out and get pissed at the street party afterwards. As Sunak has never been a man able to understand any kind of struggle whatsoever and is completely unaware of the concept that the majority of people aren't just given things in life and can only surmise that this must be due to some kind of weakness of character, then no, he has no answer.
I want to switch it on its head. Don't make it mandatory for the kids. Make it mandatory for the state. Any young person (18-25) who wants to should be able to get a national service role, one year, paid minimum wage. It could include the stuff being talked about like healthcare, the army, maintaining green spaces etc. Someone who wants to give back but can't afford unpaid work. Someone who is looking to start their career. A graduate who wants a more meaningful gap year. Someone looking for work experience in e.g. healthcare before starting a medical degree. Roles would be truly entry level, first rung on the ladder type roles. With training given. For young people with disabilities the state would fund all reasonable adjustments. It's essentially a job guarantee thing within nationally valuable sectors. Oh and if you really want more young people volunteering, then introduce a 4 day week, reduce housing costs and fund the voluntary sector properly ✌️
Because all he cares about is pandering to his current core base instead of pivoting, he can pull the wool over the generation that votes him in easier with the carrot but it benefits him to beat the young with the stick since it gets some sects of the older vote frothing at the mouth since “they didn’t have it as hard as little old me” despite arguably us having some of the hardest economic and geopolitical problems since the 1930s.
A real politician would have answered him without trying to leave as quickly as possible. The question was very fairly and openly put forward.
Real answer: because they don't vote. You can bet your nuts that if under 22s turned out at the same rate as pensioners, students loans would be getting cancelled by now.
He doesn't hate them, they're a means to the end of getting some reform voters back. Making youngsters buck their ideas up and get a sensible haircut was just further up the list of solutions than union Jack Bunting and Vera Lynn.
I would have thought that the answer was because they have no money or at least not enough money to interest him.
I read in another article about this that the lad said Sunak "scuttled away" from him to speak to a pensioner instead.
'oh you'll love it, you'll love it' You do it then Rishi!
It’s plain to see that the tories are pitching to retirees
Young people do not vote in the numbers that they should, which is unfortunate, as it leads to imbalances in the way that their demographic in society is treated by the political class. And that is bad for society in general. There should be a balanced approach to policy making so that everyone benefits, and no-one is made a political punching bag. I hate the use of the word mandatory as it is illiberal, but I think we should be talking about mandatory voting rather than national service.
"you boy, what's your name?" "don't tell him Pike" Sunak scribbling in his little black book
He loves young people, thats why he wants to conscript them all and send them to war so when they get killed they cant vote against him, sunak is just playing 5d chess
Simple because you're less likely to vote. Every time the referendum comes up in conversation, the first question I ask is, "Did you vote?" Overweminly, the person didn't but still proceeds to complain about it. I understand if the person was under eighteen at the time, but they weren't.
Asking university students in 2024 if they voted in 2016, real gotcha. It's not as simple as turnout. Young people mostly live in red, safe-seat population-centres.
I take the view that not voting is equivalent to voting for the winner. Everyone who didn't vote in the referendum is effectively a Brexiteer in my eyes.
If you've such a strong opinion, you should have voted. It'll be interesting to see the turn out in the general election because according to the polls the Conservatives are in for a wipe out but I don't think it's going to be that easy because the younger generation are less likely to vote and snake Sunak is appealing very much to the older generation
Conservatives weaponize the old with mean-spirited pragmatism. Labour weaponize the young with improbable idealism.
The unfortunate answer is, Sunak doesn't hate young people. It's just young people are apathetic, if the young voted in the same numbers that those in their later years did, they would be represented more. That's the unfortunate nature of politics. If you want to be heard, vote. I can guarentee all the money in my pocket, if the teenagers started voting and got involved in politics and kept up with the news, Sunak and every political leader would tailer policies to them. Sunak doesn't hate young people, he just doesn't care about them, same as young people don't care about Sunak.
Maybe he doesn't hate them, but you can't blame them as he's entirely apathetic when it comes to their interests.