In the context of Reform’s election success, I commented on a private Slack:
Reform can pretty much claim they’ll provide (their vision of) utopia at no cost, and they have never had to make good on their claims so who can really say they wouldn’t work?
The problem is that the stated target (economic stability and strength) isn’t the problem — I object to the means they want to use to obtain their stated ends. Because I think the ends are an excuse to justify the means, that the means won’t even achieve those ends, and most importantly because the means they propose are unethical and intolerable.
I really wish it were easier to recognise that a politician’s stated aims and actual aims may differ, not to mention that the practical effect of their effort could be the opposite of the intended effect. I’ve seen too many intelligent people fail at this to be comfortable thinking that the failure is due to stupidity.