[RobbieC]

I just want to pose the question for debate: 'How important is it that we can trust our political leaders?'
Even with optimism I can hardly see Kennedy in 10 Downing Street on May 6th, but keep asking myself why not?? Especially when a newspaper survey actually found that Britain, far and away, trusted him far more than they will ever trust Howard or Blair. Now I am aware that there are other factors such as policies etc, but when the very face of a party seems flawed, how can they remain successful? Why are people voting against their interests in trustworthy politicians?

[Bismarck]

Would you vote for a marxist or a fascist as long as he was honest about his beliefs and you trusted him to carry out his platform?

[darkknightuk]

As Tony Blair is showing, trust doesn't count for much. Good old political system.

[RobbieC]

With respect, Bismarck, the Lib Dems and Kennedy are not extremists.

[Neitzhschezehcz]

(Original post by RobbieC)
With respect, Bismarck, the Lib Dems and Kennedy are not extremists.

Swing and a miss.

[RoyFester]

Everyone knows politicians can't be trusted. The excessively media-driven political culture requires them to bend the truth as much as possible and there's nothing they can do about it. Tell the whole truth and the papers flying the opposition's flag will have a field day. That's democracy in action for ya.

It's because of this that the opposition can capitalise and throw insults related to the current government's supposed lack of integrity around like confetti. It's been happening for decades. But does it really do them any good? Hardly. Pretty much everyone knows they'd be exactly the same if they were in power. Only the exceptionally naive would be sucked in by Howard's oleaginous rhetoric.

[jamieuk20]

(Original post by RobbieC)
With respect, Bismarck, the Lib Dems and Kennedy are not extremists.

yeah, they're just completely corrupt and hypocritical

[Bismarck]

(Original post by RobbieC)
With respect, Bismarck, the Lib Dems and Kennedy are not extremists.

You seemed to imply that people should vote for Kennedy simply because he's honest. I don't think that a good enough rationale to elect someone PM.

[jamieuk20]

Kennedy and honest should NEVER exist in the same sentence unless it is the following:
"honestly, Kennedy is *******s."

[Howard]

(Original post by RobbieC)
I just want to pose the question for debate: 'How important is it that we can trust our political leaders?'

It's very important that we DO NOT trust our political leaders. Democracy & liberty depend on it.

[jamieuk20]

too true.

[yawn]

(Original post by Howard)
It's very important that we DO NOT trust our political leaders. Democracy & liberty depend on it.

Yes - implicit trust blinds us to actions that could be harmful to the society in which we live.

[JonD]

It's not precisely the leaders we distrust, but cultural cynicism towards positions of power and the skills needed to occupy them effectively. Kennedy may be very good at dishing out policies to make people feel fuzzy and moral, but he can't do much else and probably never will be in the position to do much else.