Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2019


David

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
8 hours ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

The only way that this will become "fact" is if they own up to it, and they're not likely to do that, are they?

If I had access to the highest offices of state, I wouldn't be posting here on a football message board.

She does have an agenda, which is standing up for working people, and there is nothing wrong with that.

So don’t post it as some sort of fact. You do your cause no good at all, in fact you harm it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Highgate said:

You shouldn't take them as fact, you should debate them on their merits if you have an issue with them, rather than simply resorting to the lazy ad hominem approach. 

Incidentally, neither of the labels you use to smear her character are actually negatives.

 

Agreed but that was not why I responded to a poster who was stating that the outcome was already confirmed. It was an interesting article, she actually makes some good points but the OP took it and twisted it into something that it was not.

Would you be saying the same thing if Tommy Robinson had an opinion that opposed hers? I think we’ve already seen the outcome of those discussions.. These are the double standards that we see day in , day out now. One side is shut down if it does not suit their narrative.. Unfortunately the left are masters of it.

In your defence, you are not one who does that but we have seen plenty on here who grab the moral indignation card when Robinson is mentioned..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Angry Ram said:

So don’t post it as some sort of fact. You do your cause no good at all, in fact you harm it.

Where did you get that idea from? This is a discussion board where people post and discuss various different ideas, which others may or may not agree with. I'm still waiting for a reply that rises above the level of "rubbish" or "baalocks".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

Where did you get that idea from? This is a discussion board where people post and discuss various different ideas, which others may or may not agree with. I'm still waiting for a reply that rises above the level of "rubbish" or "baalocks".

Read your post. Quite simple that’s where I got that idea from. You seem to know the future. I’m impressed. 
 

If you manage to read my subsequent replies, you will see I stated it was an interesting piece and maybe it is an issue. However it is not a certain outcome which you seem to think it is. If you had posted that there was a risk of this happening, I would have scooted over it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caroline Lucas (@CarolineLucas) Tweeted:
MPs had more time to debate the Wild Animals in Circuses Act (affecting 19 animals) than they will to decide the future of 65 million people ??‍?‍?‍??

It’s hard to think of anything which better illustrates this Govt’s contempt for people, Parliament & democracy 

#Brexit https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1186557199990087685?s=17

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, maxjam said:

The reason why no one really wants a second referendum is because after 3 years of arguing and us Brexiteers dying of old age the result is still to close to call.  Imagine if leave won again!  Be careful what you wish for...

Personally I find the idea of a second referendum pretty terrifying

Like we learned nothing from the first one? You simply don't give a binary choice referendum to a population that has been largely disenfranchised - not just be austerity, but also by the vagaries of the FPTP political system which leaves very few feeling their vote counted for anything. Given a binary choice where one option is a clear "protest" against the status quo - what did they expect?

A second referendum would be even worse  -the protest option even more attractive after 3 years of inneffective political wrangling over the last vote

I genuinely think that a lot of people no longer care about leaving the EU - they care more about the fact that the principle of the first referendum was not upheld

Because it was never really about leaving the EU - that was just a proxy for people's anger about the state of the country, and is now even more so

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, this latest saga has strengthened my decision to start supporting independent candidates at elections.

I was at the hospital yesterday and I saw staff running around all over the place. Overheard a group of nurses who are said they're overworked, struggling to cope with day to day tasks. This is the kind of area I'd like the country to sort out, rather than endlessly debate, going in circles about EU membership which quite frankly is not important. Life will go on with or without the country being in the EU. Politicians and people need to get a grip, come to a middle ground and start fixing the basic issues of our society.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

So don’t post it as some sort of fact. You do your cause no good at all, in fact you harm it.

 

1 hour ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

Where did you get that idea from? This is a discussion board where people post and discuss various different ideas, which others may or may not agree with. I'm still waiting for a reply that rises above the level of "rubbish" or "baalocks".

There's a difference between 'posting and discussing different ideas' and pretending an opinion piece is fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SchtivePesley said:

Personally I find the idea of a second referendum pretty terrifying

Like we learned nothing from the first one? You simply don't give a binary choice referendum to a population that has been largely disenfranchised - not just be austerity, but also by the vagaries of the FPTP political system which leaves very few feeling their vote counted for anything. Given a binary choice where one option is a clear "protest" against the status quo - what did they expect?

A second referendum would be even worse  -the protest option even more attractive after 3 years of inneffective political wrangling over the last vote

I genuinely think that a lot of people no longer care about leaving the EU - they care more about the fact that the principle of the first referendum was not upheld

Because it was never really about leaving the EU - that was just a proxy for people's anger about the state of the country, and is now even more so

I think you're right. Sadly though, the can of worms has already been opened by holding the first referendum. Regardless of whether you were a leaver or remainer, I think it would be difficult to argue that we all knew the full implications of leaving (both positive and negative) and the campaigns were hardly free from miss-information, speculation and scare mongering on both sides. I can't see how it would be any different second time around.

I voted to remain (and would do so again) but, in my opinion (based on no facts or research whatsoever. Just my view) a second referendum would very likely return a small majority in favour of remaining. What would we do then? Best of three?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Angry Ram said:

Agreed but that was not why I responded to a poster who was stating that the outcome was already confirmed. It was an interesting article, she actually makes some good points but the OP took it and twisted it into something that it was not.

Would you be saying the same thing if Tommy Robinson had an opinion that opposed hers? I think we’ve already seen the outcome of those discussions.. These are the double standards that we see day in , day out now. One side is shut down if it does not suit their narrative.. Unfortunately the left are masters of it.

In your defence, you are not one who does that but we have seen plenty on here who grab the moral indignation card when Robinson is mentioned..

I've avoided discussions of that individual like the plague for ages now.  He doesn't interest me in the slightest.  So you may be confusing me with others. His name does crop up frequently on these pages, no doubt.

Ive only read a couple of Naomi Klein's books.  But her theses seem to be intelligent, well researched and lucid.  Left of centre certainly, but the way to argue against her is approaching it point by point with valid counter arguments, which surely exist.  Instead you just did what you are accusing the left of doing.

What would society be like without social activism and feminism.? Two absolutely necessary agents of change over the past century or so. Change for the better.  Do individuals in both categories go too far sometimes?  Absolutely they do. All movements go too far, as Bertrand Russell said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, A Ram for All Seasons said:

Caroline Lucas (@CarolineLucas) Tweeted:
MPs had more time to debate the Wild Animals in Circuses Act (affecting 19 animals) than they will to decide the future of 65 million people ??‍?‍?‍??

It’s hard to think of anything which better illustrates this Govt’s contempt for people, Parliament & democracy 

#Brexit https://twitter.com/CarolineLucas/status/1186557199990087685?s=17

Have they been debating that for over 3 1/2 years too? Wow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Oh dear you're not joining the club of Remainers using the Jo Cox murder to political point score I hope?

I've searched the internet for Nigel Farage advert warning of terrorist invasion and it didnt return anything?

Can you post a link to it please?

@ariotofmyown just a laughing emoji? Have I missed the joke?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SouthStandDan said:

Well, this latest saga has strengthened my decision to start supporting independent candidates at elections.

I was at the hospital yesterday and I saw staff running around all over the place. Overheard a group of nurses who are said they're overworked, struggling to cope with day to day tasks. This is the kind of area I'd like the country to sort out, rather than endlessly debate, going in circles about EU membership which quite frankly is not important. Life will go on with or without the country being in the EU. Politicians and people need to get a grip, come to a middle ground and start fixing the basic issues of our society.

Totally agree.

The lives of people in Stoke will still be pooh however the BREXIT saga finishes up, it will be dealing with other issues that actually help them.

Or, as I said before, maybe it's just the living in Stoke bit - maybe that can never be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know nowt about politics but all this has been going on for too long,

I'm struggling now to see the positives from leaving with no deal?

Aren't we going to be worse off?

If the deal is sound for us then cool, but we've been alrate as a country over the past 3 and a half years we've been discussin this bloody thing

Theres more important jazz in our lives such as poverty and knife crime that needs sorting and discussing rather than fannying around arguin about brexit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

I've avoided discussions of that individual like the plague for ages now.  He doesn't interest me in the slightest.  So you may be confusing me with others. His name does crop up frequently on these pages, no doubt.

Ive only read a couple of Naomi Klein's books.  But her theses seem to be intelligent, well researched and lucid.  Left of centre certainly, but the way to argue against her is approaching it point by point with valid counter arguments, which surely exist.  Instead you just did what you are accusing the left of doing.

What would society be like without social activism and feminism.? Two absolutely necessary agents of change over the past century or so. Change for the better.  Do individuals in both categories go too far sometimes?  Absolutely they do. All movements go too far, as Bertrand Russell said. 

Not really, my only issue was he posted it as a certain outcome of BREXIT. That is clearly not correct and it needed pointing out. I was not debating the pros and cons of her article, that was never the point. 
it was a simple rebuke that he posted something that was based on one individuals opinion and turned it into a truth. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Angry Ram said:

Not really, my only issue was he posted it as a certain outcome of BREXIT. That is clearly not correct and it needed pointing out. I was not debating the pros and cons of her article, that was never the point. 
it was a simple rebuke that he posted something that was based on one individuals opinion and turned it into a truth.

Ok, simple but flawed  ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I guess the humour was a reaction to the Jo Cox thing. Who started using her as to score political points in their favour?

I dont think linking a politicians death to someone and something that had nothing to do with it is a laughing matter. Each to their own though. Not the first time we have seen a Remainer do it to be fair so guess it is becoming the norm. Still guess it's not as bad as using awful words like surrender and betrayal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...