[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..yeah, I’m really not sure, given the choices of the two main parties..who I will vote for atm...hmmm, I’m thinking that it won’t be either of those main parties which I guess will be a bit of a dud vote I know but I’m just not on board with either party or party leader to feel anything other...just touching on something in the thread, which is the proof thing...I guess in the absence of given proof for certain things, we start to look at things like integrity of the person conveying ‘their truth’ as well..and also that same integrity of the person being discussed to help is in what we feel we see as highly possible or less possible, you know..?..I’m not sure if that makes sense, but well it’s Saturday morning so......anyways, integrity is something I struggle to see in Jeremy Corbyn and like you, TS...what I see more is an opportunist and I feel disingenuity ..not tha I feel any integrity from Theresa May either so there lies the rub...obviously it’s about a party’s whole policies as well but the leader of that party is a big part of guiding and fulfilling those policies...so obviously ‘believing in’ someone to make good decisions and then to‘deliver’ as it were, is very important...I guess what I’m thinking atm is so long as I vote for one because that one might be a better option than the other....?...then does that just reduce chances of ever getting party leaders who do have high integrity because I’ve gone with the ‘make do’ option of all that has been presented...it feels that the only way to be given better options in my vote is just to say no, and refuse both of them with what’s being offered to us......I’m not sure if either becoming more centre or of a third party becoming a real contender and giving them a run for their money will ever happen in my lifetime because these things do take time etc...but for my children and to make those things even a possibility for them..(..Or for their children...)...I just feel that I have to say no to both in my vote and come back to me when you offer something less rubbish and when either of you get closer to what what is needed to get it all back on track...

No, there is no looking at the integrity of the person the burden of proof is there and should there be a case to be heard then there will be a weight of evidence, last year we were encouraged to 'ignore experts'... Why? because that is very specifically the facts on any given issue, yet it rarely corresponds with what we're told on topics such as child poverty, homelessness or mortality rates.

Look at the issue at hand, the 'Troubles', were those in positions of power and influence jailing innocent people? Have the newspapers been asked to retract lies (the Nicola Sturgeon flag story). was the PM not criticised for here 'disingenuous' use of NHS data by one of her on MPs?.. And then there's Trump!

I think that more than equates to the continued need for facts that can be substantiated, as we can't and shouldn't be expected to make considered decisions on the opinions of others.