seligehgit wrote: » We'll just have to agree to disagree.:)
riffmongous wrote: » Why did you thank a post saying 'imagine saying that in an interview' then, if you read everything
meeeeh wrote: » I live in rural area. My neighbours are relatively big farmers, business owners, doctors, teachers, engineers, pharmacists, accountants and similar. I don't think telling us that we don't understand big words will solve their problem.
emaherx wrote: » She explicitly said rural people, if most people are of that attitude why single out rural dwellers and say they wouldn't understand these new big words? What if they had singled out a Dublin district in the same way? It was poor and people are right to be insulted. They are a green party looking for a green vote and they are afraid to discuss biodiversity with rural people that's bizarre if nothing else.
riffmongous wrote: » Because many people just plain aren't interested in it. It's not that they can't understand it, I'm sure most can, but do they want to, not necessarily. No different to urban voters, only that's not what they were talking about, it was a debate on how to win votes in rural areas. Look if a Green Party activist called to the door, who do you think the average rural person would be more open to talking to: a) the stranger banging on about biodiversity, sustainability, Kyoto or the Protocol, Paris agreement and the ECCP or b) the person they recognise from the local matches and tidy towns who is interested in talking about why there was less/more swallows around this year and how bad the weather was this summer
seligehgit wrote: » What a patronising post.:rolleyes: Read it in full and there's no lack of clarity in what she meant.
riffmongous wrote: » It's plain as day, I don't think half of them even read the article or tried to understand what she was saying, before looking to get offended and piling on.
emaherx wrote: » I read ever word, and it was fairly insulting BS. Please explain why rural dwellers would be less likely to understand these very common words?
Eric Cartman wrote: » Standard dublin centric academic elitism, goes hand in hand with socialist politics “we have degrees, we know whats best for you”
listermint wrote: » Wait should we all be living in cold caves now ? Ffs I've no time for the green party. But retrofitting your own home so that is comfortable to live in and has low running cost into old age is smart. Anyone who thinks it's not needs to get off mad conspiracy forums on Facebook. Nonsense
MrMusician18 wrote: » To be honest I think you've hit the nail on the head there. There are some posters here who would find fault with anything the greens do. Tailoring your language to your audience is something that politicians do. For example George Washingtons inauguration speech was to fellow senators and congressmen and the language is of college graduate level. Obama's and Trump's inauguration speech was at a third/fourth grade level.
riffmongous wrote: » Ah come off it, of course you have to talk to people differently. Do you think farmers don't treat people differently when there is a farming discussion outside the farming forum? Do doctors talk the same way to patients that they would to other doctors? You can still treat people as equals without treating them equally in every sense, and that's what she was actually saying, treat them normally, don't try to be all high and migthy and try to relate and talk to them instead
"If you start engaging with people and you're using - even the word 'sustainable' or 'biodiversity' - this is vocabulary that's new stuff and we shouldn't assume that people understand what they are.
riffmongous wrote: » I grew up in a rural village and I never once heard anyone talking about biodiversity. Do I think every country person knows exactly what they mean? Not a chance, I'm sure almost everyone could figure it out quickly but you're not going to connect with your audience that way. It's hard to take this thread seriously tbh, if a green party person called round to any of the usual people here and starting talking to them about biodiversity they'd be straight away online afterwards starting a thread going on about how out of touch with the common farmer the green party are. Any excuse here just to have a go at them
OscarMIlde wrote: » There are plenty of very intelligent people in Clondalkin. It's a working class Dublin area that established an Irish speaking community centre, TWO primary gaelscoileanna, and a secondary gealscoil, at a time when it was neither trendy nor government supported to undertake such measures.
Yurt! wrote: » That's not the Green Party I recognize in the slightest. Activists I know are architects, engineers, scientists and in other skilled occupations. Have their head screwed on and are a degree more thoughtful with a more defined vision for the economy and society than the average yahoo from the 'big 2' parties, who can often be just loudmouths on-the-make. They have an image problem in rural areas, but then again there are parts (only parts mind you) of rural Ireland that are completely resistant to sensible planning and a farming lobby that for the longest time thought it was their constitutioanal right to harm our shared environment (again, they're slowly coming around to the ideas that the environment is there for us all). That said, this Senator's notions on rural voters and 'big words' are patronising sh*te. The neighbors either side of my homestead, well in the sticks would eat her for breakfast with 'big words.'
Fighting Tao wrote: » The speech was modified to the target audience, the Green Party convention. I really don’t get why people are getting so offended. We all modify our speech for the target audience. The target audience here was not the rural population or travellers.
meeeeh wrote: » I live in rural area. My neighbours are relatively big farmers, business owners, doctors, teachers, engineers, pharmacists, accountants and similar. I don't think telling us that we don't understand big words will solve their problem. Despite what green party leftwing thinks their main base is middle class, relatively educated and enthusiastic about going to farmers market and doing a bit of cycling on their holidays. SF and to some extent FF will hoover up voters who don't do big words. Green party are more in danger of alienating well off rural votes they could get than winning any new ones with talking about birds and bees.
Yamanoto wrote: » Perhaps that was true back in the day, but the younger wing of the party (including those who vehemently opposed entry into coalition government) are cultural Marxists and SJW's, who's policies are a world away from insulating your attic, taxing carbon and brewing up some elderflower wine.
Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: » Curiously, I haven't noticed any outrage from fellow GP attendees at that convention about their attitudes to equality for rural dwellers and Travellers. I mean, if that attitude was atypical, surely some body of members would have objected and pointed out the fallacies in her presentation and that all voters should be treated equally? Very curious, that. Perhaps they might be better served by sorting out their own inadequacies than pointing out others perceived shortcomings?
"I think colloquialism is important and I think simple vocabulary includes everybody. "It's not your job to show off that you know cool terms when you’re canvassing. It's to show that you can relate to everybody," she said.
TheBlackPill wrote: » Please modify your speech to the target audience.. there nobody insulted or patronised. Fianna Fail canvassers have this down to a fine art.. all things to all men
riffmongous wrote: » As you notice yourself, it's atypical.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c599644a213e5f18742e0afff85076a6.svg)
