Yeah, at the moment, I'm seeing the majority of the news on politics coming my way is outrage-inducing, and I by default ignore articles like that. They don't actually convey any useful information, but they sell. I think it's reasonable to assume that none of the political parties actually want to murder babies.

I'm getting very little actual real reasonable information about what the politicians will actually want to do. The truth is, good things will happen and bad things will happen in the country. No political party can prevent that. They might be able to make a very small change, but that's it. They are all trying to make improvements, and they have different ideas on how to do that. Which one is right? Well, if we knew that, the parties would agree on it and argue about something else.

Trying to make improvements for who, and why? That's the important part, and why politics gets so heated. You sound like you're talking about choosing between slightly different flavours of ice cream.

It's quite possible to have a heated argument without the mudslinging and dirty tactics that we are seeing now.

I'm not sure there is any other stance that can be taken other than a nakedly partisan one. Each side is obviously going to think that the media is biased against them because because lies the other side believes are a lot more visible than lies they believe, because when the media sides with them it's just what they expect but when the media sides with their opponents it's shocking and anger-inducing, and so on and so forth.