It is not a fallacy if they fail to get their message across. One thing is what they describe as their economic policy, in very vague and general terms. Another is giving the voters the impression that they do have a clear-cut, concrete position on specific economic issues in a sufficiently vigorous way to emancipate them from being seen as just "green."
Preconception is different to reality, and if people, pfmers included, are determined to cling to preconceptions even after the evidence based reality has been shown to them, as they do, then that is not the fault of Reality or those demonstrating it.
Not true. If people prefer their own ignored to looking at reality, that is the problem. It’s all very well repeating the lie that the Greens are a one trick pony, but have you taken the time to read what has been put in front of you?
Sure, but it's the fault of a political party if it can't adequately communicate what it's about. To a receptive audience or otherwise. Or is it OK to "win the argument", rather like Jeremy Corbyn? Didn't do him much good, did it?
You can’t communicate to people who put their fingers in their ears and won’t listen.
How have those who have charged with running the country been doing?
I know. But not everyone here has their fingers in their ears. You aren't communicating if you so categorise everyone who doesn't agree with everything you say, and that's what you are doing here. "I've made my point, I'm right, and if anyone chooses not to listen to me then they're just not listening, it's their loss" is the worst kind of lazyness.
Jeremy Corbyn didn't win bugger-all, particularly not an election. That's what got us another 4 years of the current shower. He couldn't win a church raffle if he bought all the tickets. He was, and remains, bloody useless.
Arrogance? straight in with the insults again, nice. No, the worst type of arrogance is making stuff up when someone disagrees with you. I didn’t say “I’ve made my point…..blah, blah, blah” What I said was that if people prefer to ignore evidence that challenges their preconceptions, if people refuse to even consider or read evidence put before them, then you can’t communicate with them.
So who do you trust to run the country?
Unluckily you probably won't get to decide sooner.
To get back to the OP, is there, IYO, an alternative to Labour?
Actually, as an activist I thought he was very effective, he was just useless as a leader.
I edited it to "lazyness" while you were quoting it. So lazyness it is.
because this *implies* that everyone who doesn't agree with you has their fingers in their ears. You neglect to consider that there is a continuum of people out there. Sure, some will be deaf for ever. Some wil think like you. In between the two is a vast range of people who are listening. This is your audience, if you elect to dismiss them as "preferring to ignore" you then that's up to you.
Where did I say you did? Now who's making stuff up?
Really? Forgotten Blair/Brown? Are they too right wing neoliberals in your mind?
If Corbyn is the only alternative, God help us all. That really is no alternative. Also, where do I dismiss the Green alternative? A quote would be good, and let's just be clear that criticising someone's ability to communicate is hardly dismissal.
Yes, he was. But this is "Labour Party as campaigning group" which has been very apparent in their strategy for a while. I've been critical of that here in the past. If you are the Greens, then it makes sense. They don't have the people to get elected into government, so they gain progress by getting mainstream parties to adopt their policies. Great. But Labour shouldn't be doing this. They are the alternative party of government. They need to be in charge. To be in charge you have to be elected. Blair and Brown effected an enormous amount of positive change in this country. Did they get it all right, all the time? Of course not. But the alternative was what we have seen for the last 12 years, of an increasingly authoritarian right wing government selling off the country to their friends and trousering the proceeds.
