Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Barely a third think they’ll get timely treatment from the NHS – politicalbetting.com

124

Comments

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    Bit unfair on the SLDs. But the point is what happened to Slab in 2015.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 24,682
    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The US constitution has been amended 27 times

    Not once in the last 50 years and most of them in the 18th and 19th centuries before universal suffrage in the US
    The 27th amendment was ratified in, er, 1992, which is considerably less than 50 years ago. HTH!
    It was actually submitted to Congress for ratification in 1789
    Yes but it was actually ratified, and thus the constitution amended, in 1992.

    Please just for once in your miserable life admit that you are wrong.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    Psychotic
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,190

    On Starmer and the SNP, the decision to rule out any formal coalition is just another step in his grim determination to win power.

    Step by step, boringly slowly but very surely, Starmer and his team are anticipating each of the attack lines on Labour at the next GE and seeking to kill them stone dead well in advance. In Sturgeon's pocket? No. Return to nationalisation? No. Financially irresponsible? Not just no, but no with knobs on compared to the Tories. Unpatriotic? No, look at our flags and Starmer in military gear. Woke? No, not really (despite what some on here claim). I could go on.

    Whatever one thinks of the result, it's really a pretty impressive and methodical strategy. He'll add in the policies nearer the time; for now, he's just intent on neutering the attack lines. It could well work.

    I wonder how much of it's totally irrelevant because of the considerable possibility they're going to win the next GE purely by default.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 24,682
    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I would vote for any party that gets a grip on the border. It is THE fundamental job of any government. Secure the borders. If the Tories can’t do it, we need someone else with some hairy cullions

    Enough of this crap

    Would you like to explain why there were at least 1m illegal immigrants in the UK even before the boats came along?
    Er, no?

    It has nothing to do with the very visual invasion now happening on our shores. With Albanian gangsters ADVERTISING "safe boat trips" to the UK

    If Liz Truss needs a boost - and she does - she needs to sort this out on Day 3 of her premiership
    How?
    it's tricky. I'd say: withdraw from the ECHR, change the laws so stupid liberal lawyers can fuck off, start the flights to Rwanda, and make sure you deport A LOT to Rwanda, and make sure some Albanians are on the flights

    I think this would pretty much halt any Albanian "asylum seekers" to the UK, for a start
    But if Rwanda doesn't want A LOT?
    And the Albanians don't apply for asylum anyways.
    The answer lies in dealing with the black economy.
    Sigh

    No, it's not
    Sigh

    Yes it does.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 2,373
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    So why do you behave as if it is the main part?
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    That is a nonsense

    You say you follow Christ and therefore the new testament is your bible and even suggesting revenge is 100% non Christian
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The US constitution has been amended 27 times

    Not once in the last 50 years and most of them in the 18th and 19th centuries before universal suffrage in the US
    The 27th amendment was ratified in, er, 1992, which is considerably less than 50 years ago. HTH!
    It was actually submitted to Congress for ratification in 1789
    Yes but it was actually ratified, and thus the constitution amended, in 1992.

    Please just for once in your miserable life admit that you are wrong.
    So its process of ratification was only completed after a process taking 203 years and that somehow suggests a frequent and speedy system of constitutional amendments?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,631
    edited August 2022

    Leon said:

    I would vote for any party that gets a grip on the border. It is THE fundamental job of any government. Secure the borders. If the Tories can’t do it, we need someone else with some hairy cullions

    Enough of this crap

    At the moment, I think that it would look like a massive evasion of the main issue, even to those who really care about it.
    Can't you begin to see how this might become an issue? The Dinghy Albanians are doubling in number roughly every year. If that continues, in a year we will have 80,000, then 160,000. And this ain't gonna stop, because climate change. We can hope that the EU will secure ITS borders (which might happen), but that is relying on the kindness of strangers

    I recall when you used to scoff at people who fretted about about the EU. "No one cares"

    Oops
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I would vote for any party that gets a grip on the border. It is THE fundamental job of any government. Secure the borders. If the Tories can’t do it, we need someone else with some hairy cullions

    Enough of this crap

    Would you like to explain why there were at least 1m illegal immigrants in the UK even before the boats came along?
    Er, no?

    It has nothing to do with the very visual invasion now happening on our shores. With Albanian gangsters ADVERTISING "safe boat trips" to the UK

    If Liz Truss needs a boost - and she does - she needs to sort this out on Day 3 of her premiership
    Haven't the Tories been in power since 2010?
    They have. And they have visibly failed here. If this continues - and why should it not? indeed, why should it not get worse? - it is a major problem for them. Of course Labour would not do any better, but people are rightly blaming the government
    An awkward question is if Britain is such a terrible country why do so many migrants want to come here?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    edited August 2022
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, mobilise the tanks.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
  • HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The US constitution has been amended 27 times

    Not once in the last 50 years and most of them in the 18th and 19th centuries before universal suffrage in the US
    The 27th amendment was ratified in, er, 1992, which is considerably less than 50 years ago. HTH!
    It was actually submitted to Congress for ratification in 1789
    Yes but it was actually ratified, and thus the constitution amended, in 1992.

    Please just for once in your miserable life admit that you are wrong.
    Not a chance
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    edited August 2022

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    That is a nonsense

    You say you follow Christ and therefore the new testament is your bible and even suggesting revenge is 100% non Christian
    I suggest you read what God and Moses did to the Egyptians in revenge for their treatment of the Israelites
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,791
    edited August 2022

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    If you've ever overheard a sectarian conversation in Scotland, this is roughly the same level
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    That is a nonsense

    You say you follow Christ and therefore the new testament is your bible and even suggesting revenge is 100% non Christian
    "Turn the other cheek."
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    That is a nonsense

    You say you follow Christ and therefore the new testament is your bible and even suggesting revenge is 100% non Christian
    I suggest you read what God and Moses did to the Egyptians in revenge for their treatment of the Israeli test
    They had cricket in those days? Remarkable. Did the Dead Sea Scrolls report the results daily or weekly?
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    I would vote for any party that gets a grip on the border. It is THE fundamental job of any government. Secure the borders. If the Tories can’t do it, we need someone else with some hairy cullions

    Enough of this crap

    Would you like to explain why there were at least 1m illegal immigrants in the UK even before the boats came along?
    Er, no?

    It has nothing to do with the very visual invasion now happening on our shores. With Albanian gangsters ADVERTISING "safe boat trips" to the UK

    If Liz Truss needs a boost - and she does - she needs to sort this out on Day 3 of her premiership
    Haven't the Tories been in power since 2010?
    They have. And they have visibly failed here. If this continues - and why should it not? indeed, why should it not get worse? - it is a major problem for them. Of course Labour would not do any better, but people are rightly blaming the government
    An awkward question is if Britain is such a terrible country why do so many migrants want to come here?
    Not awkward just fucking moronic. You ever been to a third world shithole?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    And SLab consequently totally collapsed in 2015.

    Teaming up with total shits has a tendency to make you stench.
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    That is a nonsense

    You say you follow Christ and therefore the new testament is your bible and even suggesting revenge is 100% non Christian
    I suggest you read what God and Moses did to the Egyptians in revenge for their treatment of the Israelites
    That has nothing to do with Christ's teaching as in the new testament, and frankly your claim to be a Christian is undermined in your own words
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829

    On Starmer and the SNP, the decision to rule out any formal coalition is just another step in his grim determination to win power.

    Step by step, boringly slowly but very surely, Starmer and his team are anticipating each of the attack lines on Labour at the next GE and seeking to kill them stone dead well in advance. In Sturgeon's pocket? No. Return to nationalisation? No. Financially irresponsible? Not just no, but no with knobs on compared to the Tories. Unpatriotic? No, look at our flags and Starmer in military gear. Woke? No, not really (despite what some on here claim). I could go on.

    Whatever one thinks of the result, it's really a pretty impressive and methodical strategy. He'll add in the policies nearer the time; for now, he's just intent on neutering the attack lines. It could well work.

    I wonder how much of it's totally irrelevant because of the considerable possibility they're going to win the next GE purely by default.
    Still, better ca canny than end up jamming a spanner into the tree shredder.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I would vote for any party that gets a grip on the border. It is THE fundamental job of any government. Secure the borders. If the Tories can’t do it, we need someone else with some hairy cullions

    Enough of this crap

    At the moment, I think that it would look like a massive evasion of the main issue, even to those who really care about it.
    Can't you begin to see how this might become an issue? The Dinghy Albanians are doubling in number roughly every year. If that continues, in a year we will have 80,000, then 160,000. And this ain't gonna stop, because climate change. We can hope that the EU will secure ITS borders (which might happen), but that is relying on the kindness of strangers

    I recall when you used to scoff at people who fretted about about the EU. "No one cares"

    Oops
    If Meloni wins the Italian election next month she has pledged to stop the boats coming into Italy and send them back to Africa and Asia
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    Bit unfair on the SLDs. But the point is what happened to Slab in 2015.
    Not to mention the Orange Order, BNP and George Galloway.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 24,682
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    HYUFD said:

    The US constitution has been amended 27 times

    Not once in the last 50 years and most of them in the 18th and 19th centuries before universal suffrage in the US
    The 27th amendment was ratified in, er, 1992, which is considerably less than 50 years ago. HTH!
    It was actually submitted to Congress for ratification in 1789
    Yes but it was actually ratified, and thus the constitution amended, in 1992.

    Please just for once in your miserable life admit that you are wrong.
    So its process of ratification was only completed after a process taking 203 years and that somehow suggests a frequent and speedy system of constitutional amendments?
    Who said anything about speedy or frequent?

    As ever, when you lose an argument on facts, you introduce some new spurious criteria.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?
    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829
    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    Nah, just some nice restful Clayton diesels. Pretty safe - everyone agrees they were crap. Though some happy memories of coal and industrial trains in my childhood.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,190
    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    What does the Old Testament say?
  • Carnyx said:

    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    Nah, just some nice restful Clayton diesels. Pretty safe - everyone agrees they were crap. Though some happy memories of coal and industrial trains in my childhood.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A
    Wonderful
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    What a childish non Christian response
    The Old Testament has plenty of revenge acts and I still consider it part of the Christian bible if not the main part
    That is a nonsense

    You say you follow Christ and therefore the new testament is your bible and even suggesting revenge is 100% non Christian
    I suggest you read what God and Moses did to the Egyptians in revenge for their treatment of the Israelites
    Has God told you what he's going to do about energy bills?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    edited August 2022
    Cut in VAT by 5% is Liz' latest brainwave.
    My gas bill has trebled. Which would be doubled again if my landlord hadn't kindly put me on the cap, since I'm not covered.
    Apologies for not giving a f**k about that or about Albanians.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,570
    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    You keep saying this. Do you have a link or should I just Google?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,791
    Carnyx said:

    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    Nah, just some nice restful Clayton diesels. Pretty safe - everyone agrees they were crap. Though some happy memories of coal and industrial trains in my childhood.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A
    Or sit back and enjoy another mad MOTD
  • MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    What does the Old Testament say?
    That God can take genetically male ribs and make a female person out of them...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,505

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    The Devil's gas bill is going to be ridiculous. I hope he got a lengthy fix.
    He went for a heat exchanger a while back. Sadly the fiery lake is now the tepid pond.
    Geothermal surely!
    Don't call me Shirley.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829
    Eabhal said:

    Carnyx said:

    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    Nah, just some nice restful Clayton diesels. Pretty safe - everyone agrees they were crap. Though some happy memories of coal and industrial trains in my childhood.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A
    Or sit back and enjoy another mad MOTD
    MOTD?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,505
    dixiedean said:

    These Pakistani floods are an absolute nightmare.

    They've got our rain.
  • MPartridgeMPartridge Posts: 151
    Carnyx said:

    Eabhal said:

    Carnyx said:

    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    Nah, just some nice restful Clayton diesels. Pretty safe - everyone agrees they were crap. Though some happy memories of coal and industrial trains in my childhood.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVFYCMEoi9A
    Or sit back and enjoy another mad MOTD
    MOTD?
    Match Of The Day
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    edited August 2022

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it
    usually does much to your fury. The Moderates by allying with the Swedish Democrats have a far better chance of removing the Social Democrats than they did before
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    General Strike incoming too.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298

    dixiedean said:

    These Pakistani floods are an absolute nightmare.

    They've got our rain.
    They appear to have got plenty of others' too.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,859

    dixiedean said:

    These Pakistani floods are an absolute nightmare.

    They've got our rain.
    More like they've got China's.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 3,338
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I would vote for any party that gets a grip on the border. It is THE fundamental job of any government. Secure the borders. If the Tories can’t do it, we need someone else with some hairy cullions

    Enough of this crap

    At the moment, I think that it would look like a massive evasion of the main issue, even to those who really care about it.
    Can't you begin to see how this might become an issue? The Dinghy Albanians are doubling in number roughly every year. If that continues, in a year we will have 80,000, then 160,000. And this ain't gonna stop, because climate change. We can hope that the EU will secure ITS borders (which might happen), but that is relying on the kindness of strangers

    I recall when you used to scoff at people who fretted about about the EU. "No one cares"

    Oops
    Ultimately, I think the trouble is that all the solutions (ie detaining a thousand people a day indefinetly, or deporting them to Rwanda) involve spending vast amounts of money, and whilst around 50% of people in the UK feel strongly about the issue, they probably regard it as being of minor importance compared with something like rising fuel bills.
    The tories have no opposition from the right. Labour aren't going to prioritise this as an issue.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    IshmaelZ said:

    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
    Paul and Ringo spitroasted me.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,059
    In recent decades, amendments to the US Constitution have had expiration dates so they had only so many years to be ratified. The 27th was, obviously, too early for that precaution.

    (Those expiration dates haven't completely solved the problems as the history of the ERA shows: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment )
  • kjhkjh Posts: 8,343
    edited August 2022
    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    edited August 2022
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    edited August 2022

    In recent decades, amendments to the US Constitution have had expiration dates so they had only so many years to be ratified. The 27th was, obviously, too early for that precaution.

    (Those expiration dates haven't completely solved the problems as the history of the ERA shows: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment )

    Yes and hence no constitutional amendment proposed in the last 50 years has been ratified.

    Yet 200 constitutional amendments are proposes by members of Congress on average every 2 year Congressional term
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,570
    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    You keep saying this. Do you have a link or should I just Google?
    IshmaelZ said:

    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
    That’s it? Rather pathetic. Ex-head at best.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,570

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    As do you, frequently, on how awful England and the English are.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,829
    IshmaelZ said:

    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
    Sudden jogging of memory: this presumably the same chap.

    http://www.memorialsinportsmouth.co.uk/old-portsmouth/buckingham.htm
  • MPartridgeMPartridge Posts: 151
    Bring back Karl Bildt
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743

    Bring back Karl Bildt

    Carl
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    edited August 2022
    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    You keep saying this. Do you have a link or should I just Google?
    IshmaelZ said:

    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
    That’s it? Rather pathetic. Ex-head at best.
    Pillock, you think it's a revelation that James I is no longer with us? And WTF does "at best" mean here? You think he never was?

    I don't see any subsequent head reversing this edict, and as James was the one indisputably great biblical scholar and theologian ever to head the C of E I would have thought he was worth paying attention to.
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    Now, while everyone knows James Vi / I was "ambiguous" and everyone did at the time, you know as well as I do that James was not publicly referring to his relationship with Buckingham in a sexual sense, more platonic love. Yes, he might have been buggered / buggering senseless in reality but he would never have said that publicly.
    IshmaelZ said:

    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    You ain't as religious as me. I'm a fanatic.
    And you're talking absolute arse, my friend.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
    “Can’t stand”?!?

    Huh?

    I am an observer. I am observing the ginormous error of judgment made by Ulf Kristersson.

    I, unlike you, am a democrat. I will accept the judgement of the electorate. I will not however besmirch my own soul by giving succour to xenophobes and racists.

    I will never vote Moderate again unless and until they disown the Sweden Democrats.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    edited August 2022
    Blessed Madonna on point tonight.
    Don't tell me there isn't any good music released nowadays.
  • HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Are you going to apologise to @IshmaelZ then
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 20,050

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    It seems a pity that you're voting for the borgeliga coalition anyway? The reason party leaders sometimes get away with idiotic policies is that they can count on a core vote to support them regardless, as we see in the US with anti-Trump Republicans.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,059
    Bad news for Leon (and perhaps others here): https://pixels.com/featured/an-alien-businessman-addresses-a-man-standing-peter-c-vey.html

    (I thought something lighter was needed to cam things down a bit.)
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578

    As a Catholic, the OT is certainly second fiddle to the NT so my knowledge of it is scant, especially when it comes to trans issues.

    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    What does the Old Testament say?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    I myself am a devout Christian and a devotee of Our Lord's principal interests of wine, psilocybin mushrooms and buggery.

    I also understand what he meant when he said Μὴ κρίνετε, ἵνα μὴ κριθῆτε· Seems to be beyond you.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Are you going to apologise to @IshmaelZ then
    No, not unless he does to me also
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
    “Can’t stand”?!?

    Huh?

    I am an observer. I am observing the ginormous error of judgment made by Ulf Kristersson.

    I, unlike you, am a democrat. I will accept the judgement of the electorate. I will not however besmirch my own soul by giving succour to xenophobes and racists.

    I will never vote Moderate again unless and until they disown the Sweden Democrats.
    Fair enough but the Moderates can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to the Centre Party or Social Democrats if they collectively gain 3 or 4 Swedish Democrats for each of you they lost to form a broad rightwing government
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,481
    edited August 2022
    MrEd said:

    Evening everyone, a bit feisty here tonight. Shall we talk about transsexuals instead?

    The morning thread is about transsexuals.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    It seems a pity that you're voting for the borgeliga coalition anyway? The reason party leaders sometimes get away with idiotic policies is that they can count on a core vote to support them regardless, as we see in the US with anti-Trump Republicans.
    There are 4 Borgerlig parties:

    M and KD are in bed with SD = no thank you

    L are equivocal = no thank you

    C are 100% anti-SD

    So, either C, MP or S for me. Probably C.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,866
    edited August 2022

    On Starmer and the SNP, the decision to rule out any formal coalition is just another step in his grim determination to win power.

    Step by step, boringly slowly but very surely, Starmer and his team are anticipating each of the attack lines on Labour at the next GE and seeking to kill them stone dead well in advance. In Sturgeon's pocket? No. Return to nationalisation? No. Financially irresponsible? Not just no, but no with knobs on compared to the Tories. Unpatriotic? No, look at our flags and Starmer in military gear. Woke? No, not really (despite what some on here claim). I could go on.

    Whatever one thinks of the result, it's really a pretty impressive and methodical strategy. He'll add in the policies nearer the time; for now, he's just intent on neutering the attack lines. It could well work.

    I wonder how much of it's totally irrelevant because of the considerable possibility they're going to win the next GE purely by default.
    Yep, imagine whichever collection of numpties is the Tory government in the run up to the next GE bleating about the threat of a coalition of chaos. The sardonic laughter of voters will be deafening.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 8,343
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Yes but the other night you claimed it was all me focusing on you in some wierd way. Clearly that can't be true can it after the last few nights.

    You also claim it is us liberals and the lack of true Tories on here but in recent times both SeanF and MarqueeMark have made it abundantly clear what they think of your posts in no uncertain terms

    Does it ever cross your tiny mind there is something seriously wrong with you, because believe me there really is?

    For instance many people often post sad or happy personal stories here. They always get a huge reaction from other posters. I have never once seen you comment on or like one of these. Why not?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298
    The last 10 polls have an average Labour lead of 10.1%.
    The perky supply teacher is walking in.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,866
    edited August 2022
    dixiedean said:



    Paul and Ringo spitroasted me.

    He’s not called Ringo for nothing you know.
  • dixiedean said:

    <

    Paul and Ringo spitroasted me.

    He’s not called Ringo for nothing you know.
    If you've not watched Bullet Train one of the joys of that film is that Thomas the Tank Engine features heavily in that film.

    God bless Ringo Starr.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 25,298

    dixiedean said:



    Paul and Ringo spitroasted me.

    He’s not called Ringo for nothing you know.
    You absolutely don't need to inform me of that.
    Steady, unshowy rhythm.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Yes but the other night you claimed it was all me focusing on you in some wierd way. Clearly that can't be true can it after the last few nights.

    You also claim it is us liberals and the lack of true Tories on here but in recent times both SeanF and MarqueeMark have made it abundantly clear what they think of your posts in no uncertain terms

    Does it ever cross your tiny mind there is something seriously wrong with you, because believe me there really is?

    For instance many people often post sad or happy personal stories here. They always get a huge reaction from other posters. I have never once seen you comment on or like one of these. Why not?
    First you are the only person on here who rehashed old thread arguments tediously onto new threads with me, hopefully you have stopped that.

    Neither SeanF or Marquee Mark like Boris unlike me and as polls show still most Tory voters and members who would have him back as leader and MM has also made clear his loathing of Truss the likely next Tory leader. So neither really represent today's Conservative Party even if I too have some reservations about Truss.

    Thirdly, I have on occasion commented on personal posts or liked them but at the end of the day this is PB not Facebook or Instagram. I come here for politics not peoples' personal or social lives
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
    “Can’t stand”?!?

    Huh?

    I am an observer. I am observing the ginormous error of judgment made by Ulf Kristersson.

    I, unlike you, am a democrat. I will accept the judgement of the electorate. I will not however besmirch my own soul by giving succour to xenophobes and racists.

    I will never vote Moderate again unless and until they disown the Sweden Democrats.
    Fair enough but the Moderates can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to the Centre Party or Social Democrats if they collectively gain 3 or 4 Swedish Democrats for each of you they lost to form a broad rightwing government
    Gloriously illogical.

    Stunningly illogical.

    You really are a complete moron.
  • Cyclefree said:

    Anyway, this is what will be on my breakfast toast tomorrow. Made with plums (and some apples) from my front garden. Yum!


    What do we need with eggs and ham when we've got plum and apple jam?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Are you going to apologise to @IshmaelZ then
    No, not unless he does to me also
    Oh sorry are you God?

    Well apols. but your boy does like to get his knob out.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    dixiedean said:

    The last 10 polls have an average Labour lead of 10.1%.
    The perky supply teacher is walking in.

    The last 10 polls have an average SNP lead of 21.7%.

    The perky supply teacher is in for a baptism of fire.
  • dixiedean said:

    The last 10 polls have an average Labour lead of 10.1%.
    The perky supply teacher is walking in.

    The last 10 polls have an average SNP lead of 21.7%.

    The perky supply teacher is in for a baptism of fire.
    "Vote SNP, get Truss!"
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 3,338

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
    “Can’t stand”?!?

    Huh?

    I am an observer. I am observing the ginormous error of judgment made by Ulf Kristersson.

    I, unlike you, am a democrat. I will accept the judgement of the electorate. I will not however besmirch my own soul by giving succour to xenophobes and racists.

    I will never vote Moderate again unless and until they disown the Sweden Democrats.
    Fair enough but the Moderates can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to the Centre Party or Social Democrats if they collectively gain 3 or 4 Swedish Democrats for each of you they lost to form a broad rightwing government
    Gloriously illogical.

    Stunningly illogical.

    You really are a complete moron.
    What is wrong with what HYUFD has said? It could be a good political judgement by the Moderates. Perhaps what is going on is how democracy should work, a response to the will of the people.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MrEd said:


    Now, while everyone knows James Vi / I was "ambiguous" and everyone did at the time, you know as well as I do that James was not publicly referring to his relationship with Buckingham in a sexual sense, more platonic love. Yes, he might have been buggered / buggering senseless in reality but he would never have said that publicly.


    IshmaelZ said:

    MrEd said:


    I never remember the Pope saying that.

    As for the Queen, did she co-opt in Jesus as a fellow queen?


    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    DougSeal said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    Labour to change constitution to rule out coalition with the SNP

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/19637086/labour-constitution-rule-out-snp-coalition/

    Be ironic if they do that.
    Then find themselves under a Tory/SNP coalition because the only possible alternative administration is unconstitutional.
    No they are changing their party constitution there is no written UK constitution. Though ruling out a coalition does not prevent a Labour minority government with SNP confidence and supply in return for indyref2
    If anyone says “there is no written U.K. constitution” on here again I’m getting Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction on their ass.

    It’s uncodified. It’s not unwritten. It’s written in loads of places.

    Yes, but it can be changed. Just like that. Ergo not a proper constitution. The Tories could pass a law that HMG had to be run by a committee of clowns. You see?
    Yes indeed. Because part of our constitution is the supremacy of parliament, and within that the supremacy of the commons.

    Which means, for example that parliament can pass laws to ensure that 6 year olds can't get a machine gun for Christmas without a bogus constitutional principle stopping them, aided and abetted by the SC.

    Who would you like to be constitutionally supreme instead?

    Quite so.

    On the other hand, it's open to Pmt to declare the C of E a subversive organization and order its assets to be seized asnd turned over to hedgehog hospitals.
    Except that would be theft as the Church of England assets belong to the Church of England not the state, even if the Queen is its Supreme Governor
    It wouldn't be theft if Parliament said it wasn't.
    It would, Parliament could technically legislate to make murder legal but it would still be murder.

    Plus of course the monarch as Supreme Governor of the Church of England would correctly refuse to sign a bill confiscating its assets anyway
    I|n that case we'd be in a republic. Only takes a vote.
    No we wouldn't, the Monarch would directly dissolve Parliament and force a general election to get rid of it if the Parliament tried to legislate to legalise theft or murder
    To be elected by a pro Republic population and end the monarchy
    Crap the armed forces are loyal to the Monarch not Parliament, or civil war
    I think you will find they are loyal to the crown in parliament.

    And until you accept the explicit teaching of the head of your church that Christ was an active homosexual you are doomed to an eternity in hell anyway. Enjoy.
    Nope, the armed forces simply swear an oath of loyalty to the Monarch and their heirs and successors and to defend the Queen. Parliament is not mentioned, the government is of course Her Majesty's Government

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7289504.stm

    As for hell I suggest you get your ticket ready
    That's not a thing Christians say, just bullying fascists who like the whole belonging thing.
    Plenty of Christians still believe in hell (until the evil truly commit to Christ) and anyway he started it saying I was going there first.
    My family on both sides are and were Christians but not the bigoted type nor having a need to attend Church, but not one would have made the comment you made which is unworthy of any Christian
    Tough he started it
    But back to the main point

    The Head of your Church has unambiguously stated that Our Lord took it up the. Why do you heretically disagree?
    James VI and I.

    "You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his John, and I have my George."
    Disagree. I mean Jesus loved everyone. He certainly loved all the disciples. So if he loved one in particular it means something special.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 8,343
    edited August 2022
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Yes but the other night you claimed it was all me focusing on you in some wierd way. Clearly that can't be true can it after the last few nights.

    You also claim it is us liberals and the lack of true Tories on here but in recent times both SeanF and MarqueeMark have made it abundantly clear what they think of your posts in no uncertain terms

    Does it ever cross your tiny mind there is something seriously wrong with you, because believe me there really is?

    For instance many people often post sad or happy personal stories here. They always get a huge reaction from other posters. I have never once seen you comment on or like one of these. Why not?
    First you are the only person on here who rehashed old thread arguments tediously onto new threads with me, hopefully you have stopped that.

    Neither SeanF or Marquee Mark like Boris unlike me and as polls show still most Tory voters and members who would have him back as leader and MM has also made clear his loathing of Truss the likely next Tory leader. So neither really represent today's Conservative Party even if I too have some reservations about Truss.

    Thirdly, I have on occasion commented on personal posts or liked them but at the end of the day this is PB not Facebook or Instagram. I come here for politics not peoples' personal or social lives
    You never rehash. Oh the irony. If you reply to me at the end of a thread I will reply in the next thread. I also, unlike you, do not spend my entire life here, because unlike you, I actually have a life, so naturally I may reply many hours later. Sorry for being human. Does your employer know you spend all this time here?

    SeanF and MM comments about you had nothing to do with Boris but about your general obnoxious postings.

    Never seen a single reaction to a personal post by you. Go on identify one. And just because it is a politics site does not mean you don't show empathy to fellow posters. Do you do the same to your work colleagues after all that is work not social? I think you have demonstrated you have real problems. Really big ones.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423
    Cyclefree said:

    Anyway, this is what will be on my breakfast toast tomorrow. Made with plums (and some apples) from my front garden. Yum!


    Looks delicious.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,743
    darkage said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
    “Can’t stand”?!?

    Huh?

    I am an observer. I am observing the ginormous error of judgment made by Ulf Kristersson.

    I, unlike you, am a democrat. I will accept the judgement of the electorate. I will not however besmirch my own soul by giving succour to xenophobes and racists.

    I will never vote Moderate again unless and until they disown the Sweden Democrats.
    Fair enough but the Moderates can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to the Centre Party or Social Democrats if they collectively gain 3 or 4 Swedish Democrats for each of you they lost to form a broad rightwing government
    Gloriously illogical.

    Stunningly illogical.

    You really are a complete moron.
    What is wrong with what HYUFD has said? It could be a good political judgement by the Moderates. Perhaps what is going on is how democracy should work, a response to the will of the people.
    Because Swedish politics is all about blocs. The Twat has just written:

    “Bloc X can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to Bloc Y if they internally switch 3 or 4 Bloc X from one Bloc X party to another Bloc X party for each of you they lost to form a broad Bloc X government.”

    WTF???

    You don’t win elections by shedding voters to the governing parties while simply redistributing your voters internally among the opposition bloc.
  • Liz Truss considers ‘nuclear’ option of five per cent VAT cut
    Largest ever reduction could save families £1,300 a year in £38bn boost to economy

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/08/27/liz-truss-considers-nuclear-option-five-per-cent-vat-cut/ (£££)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348
    edited August 2022
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. So no postings by me tonight, nor the other night so you can't blame me, like you normally do, for the mess you get into nearly every night with the hate filled bigoted irrational crap you post. Why do you bother arguing with all of us if you think we are all doomed to hell.

    As most of those I argue with are secular social liberals on here whether you are here included in them or not. Whereas I am a religious social conservative, certainly in UK terms. There is if course always time to repent and see the light
    Yes but the other night you claimed it was all me focusing on you in some wierd way. Clearly that can't be true can it after the last few nights.

    You also claim it is us liberals and the lack of true Tories on here but in recent times both SeanF and MarqueeMark have made it abundantly clear what they think of your posts in no uncertain terms

    Does it ever cross your tiny mind there is something seriously wrong with you, because believe me there really is?

    For instance many people often post sad or happy personal stories here. They always get a huge reaction from other posters. I have never once seen you comment on or like one of these. Why not?
    First you are the only person on here who rehashed old thread arguments tediously onto new threads with me, hopefully you have stopped that.

    Neither SeanF or Marquee Mark like Boris unlike me and as polls show still most Tory voters and members who would have him back as leader and MM has also made clear his loathing of Truss the likely next Tory leader. So neither really represent today's Conservative Party even if I too have some reservations about Truss.

    Thirdly, I have on occasion commented on personal posts or liked them but at the end of the day this is PB not Facebook or Instagram. I come here for politics not peoples' personal or social lives
    You never rehash. Oh the irony. If you reply to me at the end of a thread I will reply in the next thread. I also, unlike you, do not spend my entire life here, because unlike you, I actually have a life, so naturally I may reply many hours later. Sorry for being human. Does your employer know you spend all this time here?

    SeanF and MM comments about you had nothing to do with Boris but about your general obnoxious postings.

    Never seen a single reaction to a personal post by you. Go on identify one. And just because it is a politics site does not mean you don't show empathy to fellow posters. Do you do the same to your work colleagues after all that is work not social? I think you have demonstrated you have real problems. Really big ones.
    I don't post during work meetings and I mainly work at home now anyway so work the hours I need in the day to get the jobs I need to do done. However I still unlike you avoid rehashing threads over and over again which is evidence yet again of your vendetta against me.

    SeanF and MM are both relative social liberals to me but neither have the personal vendetta and obsession with me you do. It isn't about issues with you, it is about me personally because half your posts on here are obsessed with me. Clearly it gives you something to do in your final years.

    At work I talk primarily about work, including to those I manage not surprisingly beyond the basic niceties about weekends etc or any personal problems raised as that is what we are employed for. Just as this is primarily a politics site
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Liz Truss considers ‘nuclear’ option of five per cent VAT cut
    Largest ever reduction could save families £1,300 a year in £38bn boost to economy

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/08/27/liz-truss-considers-nuclear-option-five-per-cent-vat-cut/ (£££)

    Don't look that nookular to me. 5%. Wow.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,866
    Fair point..


  • PhilPhil Posts: 1,231

    Liz Truss considers ‘nuclear’ option of five per cent VAT cut
    Largest ever reduction could save families £1,300 a year in £38bn boost to economy

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/08/27/liz-truss-considers-nuclear-option-five-per-cent-vat-cut/ (£££)

    “Nuclear Option”.

    Jesus wept. Energy prices have tripled (& then doubled again for commercial customers) & Truss thinks a 5% discount is going to fix everything?
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 797
    edited August 2022
    Maybe Scottish nationalists should be open to doing a deal with the Tories. Because at the moment Starmer seems to have called their bluff.
    P.s. I think Salmond would take the risk of doing a deal with the Tories. Nicola won't.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,348

    darkage said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Early evening all :)

    I must confess I'm envious of @Cyclefree's day in the Lakes and having been in Cartmel barely three weeks ago (and that's a village with more than its share of Michelin stars) I have to say the racecourse looked in magnificent shape and Good doesn't really do justice to ground which looked like a carpet.

    As for drinking Aperol (whatever that is) in NW London - meh. Canary Wharf was quieter today but the tubes weren't - TFL did its usual best to irritate everyone's weekend by running its usual "feast and famine" service - three or four tubes within five minutes and then nothing for nine minutes. Basic operational and line control seem to be deficient currently on some of the lines - it should be possible to run a 4-5 minute service at weekends but currently whoever is running the lines seems to struggle even with that basic concept.

    On to other matters and I noted @StuartDickson's comments on the Swedish election and it does seem the Moderates are having an awful campaign. The latest Novus poll has the centre right bloc on 50.7% and the centre left grouping on 47.8% but Novus does seem to poll strongly for the Sweden Democrats in particular - the latest Sifo has a dead heat on 49.6%.

    Ulf Kristersson made a deal with the devil.

    Irrespective of one’s personal opinion of the Sweden Democrats, it is indisputable that they are by far the most unpopular party among voters.

    It is a strategic blunder of mind-boggling proportions. Imagine Scottish Labour teaming up with the hated Tories to defeat Scottish self-government. Oh!
    No it isn't, the Moderates centre right coalition got 31% at the last Swedish election. Now with the Swedish Democrats added on
    the combined right of centre vote
    is 47% in the polls.

    SLAB and SCon combined won the 2014 referendum
    The Moderates have completely ruined their good name. Classic example of tactical advantage overruling strategic interests. The Social Democrats are laughing their heads off.
    Yes but the Social Democrats cannot get into government without the Moderates and the Moderates best chance of getting into government is with the Social Democrats
    Christ, you are such an ignorant twat.

    The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
    No, just the reality that Sweden might actually have a rightwing government for once rather than a government alternating between Social Democrats who dominate and occasionally Centrists and Liberals as it usually does much to your fury
    Huh? What on earth are you talking about?? I was a member of the Moderates for many years. I served as a councillor for the party. I strongly supported Fredrik Reinfeldt and Anders Borg. I will still (probably) vote for one of the “borgerlig” parties.

    You are a complete ignoramous. You mouth off about topics of which you either know nothing or have grossly misunderstood.
    Yes, you are a Centrist Liberal Scottish Nationalist at most, so you can't stand the fact the Moderates may now form a rightwing government with the Swedish Democrats
    “Can’t stand”?!?

    Huh?

    I am an observer. I am observing the ginormous error of judgment made by Ulf Kristersson.

    I, unlike you, am a democrat. I will accept the judgement of the electorate. I will not however besmirch my own soul by giving succour to xenophobes and racists.

    I will never vote Moderate again unless and until they disown the Sweden Democrats.
    Fair enough but the Moderates can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to the Centre Party or Social Democrats if they collectively gain 3 or 4 Swedish Democrats for each of you they lost to form a broad rightwing government
    Gloriously illogical.

    Stunningly illogical.

    You really are a complete moron.
    What is wrong with what HYUFD has said? It could be a good political judgement by the Moderates. Perhaps what is going on is how democracy should work, a response to the will of the people.
    Because Swedish politics is all about blocs. The Twat has just written:

    “Bloc X can afford to lose 1 or 2 of you to Bloc Y if they internally switch 3 or 4 Bloc X from one Bloc X party to another Bloc X party for each of you they lost to form a broad Bloc X government.”

    WTF???

    You don’t win elections by shedding voters to the governing parties while simply redistributing your voters internally among the opposition bloc.
    You do if you go from a coalition of 1/3 of the vote to over 45% of the vote by adding an extra party to that opposition bloc which currently is 2nd in polls
This discussion has been closed.