Hi Tim

Now you can have a referendum not an election:-)

That would give us nothing to talk about if we met in a pub (apart from how
boring it is!)

Cheers

Adam


"T i m" wrote in message
...
As this seems to be topical for some reason .. ;-)

I have never been interested in politics, just in the same way I've
never been interested in Religion, trying drugs, sport, fast cars /
bikes, smoking or holidays abroad. I guess it's not trendy to admit
such, like when you answer 'none' to the 'what team do you support'
question.

But unlike football or Religion I am feeling a bit guilty by not
'joining in' with this voting thing and I could (well, if I could be
bothered walking the 50 yards to the polling station) do what I've
done many times previously and spoil my paper (want to retain the
right to vote but don't have any trust / faith / interest knowledge
in the whole thing right now yada yada).

Don't get e wrong, I am a bit interested (but now the elections are
getting like Xmas and seem to go on for ages) but don't know enough
about it all to make a useful vote for what is really good for the
*country*, assuming that's the point of course.

Personally, if I was looking for advice re which way to vote (and I'm
not thanks) I think I'd vote for a sensible dictatorship and stop what
I see as a huge squandering of time, effort and cash while people play
power games with each and make promises they probably wouldn't keep
even if they got the chance.

Right, I'm putting my head back in the sand down the shed ... (the
bearings and brushes have turned up from Canada for the router I'm
fixing for my mate).

Much more interesting, useful, logical and reliable. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 12 May 2010 19:01:29 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:

Hi Tim

Yo,

Now you can have a referendum not an election:-)

So, we (well, 'some people') voted for team A but although they got
more votes than team B they didn't get sufficiently more so we
discard them and get team B and team C to join together. They then
tick off all the ideas they had in common then tick off one compromise
each till they 'agree'. That all sounds very democratic and reasonable
even if we (the majority) didn't want teams B or C in charge.

If we could actually trust them *all* to do the right thing it might
be nice to ask team A to join in and play as well, but no teams A and
B will now be wasting loads of energy throwing the stones back at team
C.

That would give us nothing to talk about if we met in a pub (apart from how
boring it is!)

I think Monaco and Luxembourg have something, lets go there for a pint
(once we have saved up that is). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 12 May 2010 19:50:09 +0100, T i m wrote:


If we could actually trust them *all* to do the right thing it might
be nice to ask team A to join in and play as well, but no teams A and
B will now be wasting loads of energy throwing the stones back at team
C.

No, 'teams B and C will be ...' told you I shouldn't be allowed to
vote. ;-(

T i m

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 May 2010 19:50:09 +0100, T i m wrote:


If we could actually trust them *all* to do the right thing it might
be nice to ask team A to join in and play as well, but no teams A and
B will now be wasting loads of energy throwing the stones back at team
C.

No, 'teams B and C will be ...' told you I shouldn't be allowed to
vote. ;-(

T i m

To be fair the only thing more boring than an election is Luxembourgh.

Adam

On Wed, 12 May 2010 21:26:55 +0100, "ARWadsworth"
wrote:


To be fair the only thing more boring than an election is Luxembourgh.


Hehe

T i m