Could it be that the next PM is NOT an Oxford Grad? – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
This is the situation Johnson has put the Tories in. Damned if they keep him, damned (now) that they have kicked him out.Leon said:My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
I think Johnson was leading them to a historic drubbing, but there was a small chance he might have turned it round. Under new leadership I think they will lose by less, but also have virtually no chance of actually winning. On a balance of probability basis that is probably better for them.1 -
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?-1 -
OOOOOOOH that’s hard. Not least because the photo is so shitFrancisUrquhart said:Guess away
So, old
Immediate thought: Mexico or the Caribbean
But the road looks well maintained, so prosperous. Hmmm!0 -
But we know the attack lines (we've already seen 'Sunak is a wet remainer despite having always backed leave') that faction are intending to employ.RochdalePioneers said:
That isn't why they removed Boris at all.HYUFD said:
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?Leon said:Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
What will be interesting is who they don't try to undermine, either as they are no threat or because they back them.0 -
What astounds me is the appalling "quality" of the candidates. I know that Boris is accused of surrounding himself with low quality wannabes and has-beens but is this lot really all that is available?Leon said:My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
There is no way that any of this shower will lead the Tories to victory at the next election.0 -
I don't think you're her type mate.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?1 -
It’s clearly no secret. I never ever was interested in a man even after five years in dormitories at boarding school but you ride up here on your horse, topless, dripping masculinity and all I want to do is lube myself up and fuck you in the arse.KevinB said:
Do you secretly fancy me boulayboulay said:I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
And Kevin is seriously in the closet.
Who knew you could turn people so easily?
3 -
Wishful thinking I am afraidJonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
They are over
And for clarification I am not opposed to Wallace but I am not convinced he is going to stand
1 -
Mersea islandFrancisUrquhart said:Guess away
0 -
yes good post..Boris had the magic spark..Sunak wont appeal in the red wallOnlyLivingBoy said:
This is the situation Johnson has put the Tories in. Damned if they keep him, damned (now) that they have kicked him out.Leon said:My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
I think Johnson was leading them to a historic drubbing, but there was a small chance he might have turned it round. Under new leadership I think they will lose by less, but also have virtually no chance of actually winning. On a balance of probability basis that is probably better for them.0 -
I hope his first action will be to withdraw the whip from Rees-Mogg and tell him to join Labour.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
If Johnson's remaining supporters object, he could do the same to the rest of them. Five MPs will make little difference to his majority but will have a good moral effect and a great effect on morale.
Plus, getting rid of Mogg, Dorries, Bone, Jenkyn and Fabricant would raise the average IQ of the PCP by about 8%.2 -
Even if Sunak won the leadership and somehow scraped a win at the next general election then yes Boris loyalists would make his life he'll with rebellions in the subsequent Parliament as Thatcherite rebels made Major's life hell from 1992 to 1997Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w0 -
I support bringing him down before that happens. Just not up to it. No solutions.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
So I'm glad JRM is firing NLaws at his campaign. I want Nadine to say some sharp words about the price of milk too.
I am actually really really interested in the views of these parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians:
Dominic Cummings
Lord Frost
Theresa May
Boris Johnson
David Davis
Their preferences I think would tell us a lot.
2 -
This was pretty believableFoxy said:
I rather liked this one:Nigelb said:Best thread on the leadership race, so far.
https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1545376694277734402
** 14 April 2024 - Day 646 of Tory Leadership Race **
- Every single Tory MP still in the race except Ben Wallace who is leading a Ukrainian tank division to reclaim Crimea;
- Johnson still in No. 10 and planning addition of 3rd floor to son's treehouse
….
- Rishi Sunak rescued after fourteen hours trapped in own car due to both valets who ordinarily open doors for him calling in sick.
Rescuers bemused but appreciative of his attempts to tip them by repeatedly tapping their foreheads with his Black Amex.
- The House of Lords swells to 14,423 members as Boris Johnson continues to appoint anyone who has ever tweeted anything nice about him.
New Lord Britain4Boris2024 attends ceremony remotely from St. Petersburg but says he still feels included as ceremony is conducted in Russian.
- Keir Starmer delivers withering cross in PMQ's and the 12 political obsessive centre left journos watching tweet that "This is the end of Johnson" for the 947th time.
1 -
agreed much bad blood it will split the tory party in twoHYUFD said:
Even if Sunak won the leadership and somehow scraped a win at the next general election then yes Boris loyalists would make his life he'll with rebellions in the subsequent Parliament as Thatcherite rebels made Major's life hell from 1992 to 1997Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w1 -
I had my worst professional experience there.Heathener said:
I'm gobsmacked. Wow.FrancisUrquhart said:
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day (or rather, that I saw). Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.0 -
Would it make sense for a Conservative candidate for PM to decide to skip this contest? (Assuming they are young enough.)
I am no seer, but it seems to me that the successful candidate is likely to have a short and miserable couple of years in Number 10, lose a general election, and then be replaced as leader.
But let me know if this strategy is implausible. Or if none of the potential candidates would think like that.
0 -
Rees Mogg criticised Sunak before. In some respects Sunak, a slick liberal ex banker, has more in common with Emmanuel Macron than Margaret Thatcherkle4 said:
Who he was happy to support mere days ago. And if he was not, he is claiming Boris was a terrible PM because he would be admitting Boris could not control his own Chancellor.HYUFD said:Rees Mogg lays into Sunak tonight calling him 'the high tax Chancellor of a low tax party'
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1545495803309035520?s=20&t=Hkrayn5myVcMmAbISYCotw
Which do you think it is - is he lying about thinking Sunak is terrible, or is he admitting Boris was terrible?0 -
Go stick your pinhead up your fat ass, you fucking piss-ant punk.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?2 -
0
-
Yes, she had loads of boyfriends, but they were idiots so we forced her onto a lesbian conversion therapy course, which did the trick.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Wanker.4 -
You’re not really “joining in the fun” are you, Woolie?wooliedyed said:
Mersea islandFrancisUrquhart said:Guess away
I think these pic games are a laugh, but every picture must have enough clues in it, such that you can make a reasonable guess via deduction, without having been there. Otherwise it’s stupid
There were enough clues in @Heathener’s photo. Not sure about @FrancisUrquhart’s1 -
The two only things I can come up with are...Casino_Royale said:
I don't understand it at all.RandallFlagg said:Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
But, it seems to exist.
1)He's associated with the May regime and her Brexit deal (particularly as he didn't serve in Boris' cabinet). So if you hated her premiership and her deal, that might affect how you feel towards Hunt. He also might be less likely to scrap the NI protocol than other candidates because he seemed happy with her "soft Brexit" deal.
2) The membership is still fairly pro-Boris, while Hunt is seen as a major critic of his regime (kle4 has also mentioned this). Electing him leader would be akin to Labour electing Jess Phillips in the 2020 leadership election. Anyone who refuses to serve in the previous leader's cabinet/shadow cabinet and is seen as critical of them doesn't get the crown.0 -
Your daughter is very lucky to have such a wonderful supportive family . Bless you and thanks for such an inspiring post .Northern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?6 -
I would add Red Wall v Blue Rinse to that list of divides. I heard Esther McVey's name mentioned earlier today- she could be the Red Wall candidate. Either her or Dehenna Davison.Gardenwalker said:
I’m sure that’s right, although the divisions in the party are harder to read these days.HYUFD said:
Normally the final 2 are a One Nation centrist v a rightwinger eg Johnson v Hunt, May v Leadsom, Cameron v Davis, IDS v Clarke, Hague v Clarke, Major v Redwood (in 1990 Major presented himself as a Thatcherite rightwinger v Heseltine).algarkirk said:
Wallace v Sunak would be an interesting final among the members.HYUFD said:
Most of Boris' support will swing behind Wallace rather than Truss next week, anti Boris MPs will split between Sunak, Hunt, Tugendhat and Javid, giving Wallace enough to make the final 2boulay said:I’m making my early prediction - which will be bollocks no doubt.
It’s going to get to a choice of three - Rishi, Truss and a hunt/tugendhat.
Rishi will have the numbers, not enough to beat Truss but the hunt/other crew will realise he’s a better option than Truss and publicly shift their support to Rishi.
It will be made clear to Truss she won’t win a run-off and will be offered a senior role.
They (not Truss) will do what is necessary to avoid it going to the membership.
Rishi will ultimately be a palatable pick for most of the MPs, young, fresh, dishing Labour by having a BAME (not sure if this is the correct term) experienced at the highest level, doesn’t need money so not corruptible and can buy own wallpaper, Brexiters but pragmatic, sound money but can sell the idea to the country “were in the shit so this isn’t what I want but pull together for a bit longer and all will be better”.
As I said - prob balls but I think it’s a good chance.
So in my view Tugendhat or Hunt v Wallace is more likely than Sunak or Truss v Wallace.
Metropolitan libertarians eg Portillo or Gove or effectively Sunak and Truss rarely make the final 2
Brexit v Remain
Wets v Dry
Old School Squires v Metro Liberals
One Nation Tories vs Populists
Eg
Brexity - Baker, Braverman, Mordaunt, Truss, Zahawi, Sunak
Remainery - Tugendhat, Hunt, Wallace, Javid0 -
I think Hunt is the only leadership contender who was a member of Cameron's first Cabinet. Given the revolutionary nature of Brexit, and of running against the austerity of the Cameron years, you could see why that link to the past would count against him.OnlyLivingBoy said:
It's bizarre. Hunt is like a Tory leader out of central casting, but is apparently anathema to the membership. Too Remainery? Too metropolitan? Too sensible?Casino_Royale said:
I don't understand it at all.RandallFlagg said:Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
But, it seems to exist.1 -
What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?0
-
Because that is not why Boris had to go. What happened between the vonc, which Boris survived, and this week? Number 10's chaotic response and serial dissimulation around Pinchergate, and the two by-elections which, taken together, showed Boris was motivating anti-Tory tactical voting.HYUFD said:
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?Leon said:Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt1 -
The guy in that looks like Richard Tyndall...kle4 said:
Congratulations on your psychic abilities to tell what people are thinking.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
Besides, some people have awkward looking smiles anyway1 -
You may be surprisedBeibheirli_C said:
What astounds me is the appalling "quality" of the candidates. I know that Boris is accused of surrounding himself with low quality wannabes and has-beens but is this lot really all that is available?Leon said:My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
There is no way that any of this shower will lead the Tories to victory at the next election.0 -
Good post.ydoethur said:
If you think I'm leftish, God help you, as not that long ago I was a fairly dependable Conservative although I was never a party member and voted for other parties as and when I saw fit.Omnium said:
I think you're leftish. I'm sure you're really quite informed on history. I have recently read a book or two on the Korean war. Harsh times of course, but Atlee really doesn't look good. I'd also formed a less praiseworthy picture from other sources. I'm interested as to whether you think Atlee is over-regarded.ydoethur said:
Churchill was bald by 1951, also very deaf.Heathener said:Was Clement Attlee the last bald man to win an election? In 1950?
I think there is a tendency to be starry eyed about Attlee simply because he was regarded by the left as not only Labour's most successful leader until recently but in many ways the only truly successful one who totally changed the terms of economic discourse in this country for decades.
However, quite a lot of that would have happened anyway, and his government contained some pretty nasty human beings, the likes of Dalton, Shinwell and Bevan who quite openly made policy based on punishing those they hated (those with any money) not based on sound governance. Which had a number of disastrous side effects including the blowing of huge sums of Marshal aid as current account expenditure on economically unremunerative ventures e.g. the NHS when they could have been spent on repairing war damage. Ironically, that's much the same thing Labour (and Harold Macmillan) later accused Thatcher of doing with North Sea Oil and the profits from selling nationalised industry.
At the same time, they achieved a very great deal of their programme - however flawed it was - against a ticking clock and facing very difficult circumstances, including the unwinding of Britain's war debts, the winter of 1946-47 followed by the harvest failures of the later 1940s, the beginning of the Cold War which stretched Britain militarily and the increasing pressure from the colonies for independence at this moment. That's no small achievement.
Overall, like most governments, the record is mixed. Whether for good or ill, however, they did change Britain very considerably. And they wouldn't have done it without Attlee's diplomatic skill in keeping the government of Bevan, Bevin, Morrison, Dalton, Cripps and Ede, who all hated each other, together and functioning.
For that, he probably does deserve to be ranked alongside Thatcher as the most impactful postwar PM.
Hope that is of interest.
I have often enjoyed reading about the feuds between that cabinet. From this perspective, there are some good anecdotes. But you make a good point; it must have taken considerable skill to keep them together.0 -
Plus he was up Murdoch's arse for much of that first role before he was moved to Health.LostPassword said:
I think Hunt is the only leadership contender who was a member of Cameron's first Cabinet. Given the revolutionary nature of Brexit, and of running against the austerity of the Cameron years, you could see why that link to the past would count against him.OnlyLivingBoy said:
It's bizarre. Hunt is like a Tory leader out of central casting, but is apparently anathema to the membership. Too Remainery? Too metropolitan? Too sensible?Casino_Royale said:
I don't understand it at all.RandallFlagg said:Why is Hunt so toxic amongst the membership? I know he has the reputation of being a remainer, but he's not exactly Grieve, Clarke, or Heseltine. He was about as prominent as an advocate of the EU as May was in the 2016 referendum... which is to say, not much at all.
But, it seems to exist.0 -
We were lucky enough to at PB, to get upgraded to the Level IV Troll - the one that’s clearly actually studied in the UK at some point, has followed politics here for a while, and knows just enough about a few divisive subjects to draw out the sort of personal comments that he thinks can be used to set people against each other. He’s a big upgrade on the Level III Troll we had last month though, he was as useless as a Russian invasion of Kiev.Northern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?6 -
Gosh. Able to elaborate?Roger said:
I had my worst professional experience there.Heathener said:
I'm gobsmacked. Wow.FrancisUrquhart said:
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day (or rather, that I saw). Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.
@Leon is right about my pic. If you looked closely, especially to the right, you could see the volcanic terrain. Also being above the cloud line is a classic Canary thing - hence the observatories on Tenerife and, most famously, La Palma itself.1 -
Not sure what's going on with @KevinB but there is a solution - one up the bum, no harm done.
Don't knock it til you've tried it1 -
LOoks like a fabric canopy roof over a seaside restaurant. But I bow to your expertise.Leon said:What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?
0 -
Did a hairdresser wallop the 'talent' ?Roger said:
I had my worst professional experience there.Heathener said:
I'm gobsmacked. Wow.FrancisUrquhart said:
You are absolutely right. It is indeed La Ruta de los Volcanos on La Palma.
I was the only person walking it that glorious day (or rather, that I saw). Pretty remote at times and with smouldering volcanoes, which as we now know are not dormant.0 -
Cummings will be for Sunak no questionLuckyguy1983 said:
I support bringing him down before that happens. Just not up to it. No solutions.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
So I'm glad JRM is firing NLaws at his campaign. I want Nadine to say some sharp words about the price of milk too.
I am actually really really interested in the views of these parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians:
Dominic Cummings
Lord Frost
Theresa May
Boris Johnson
David Davis
Their preferences I think would tell us a lot.0 -
It is very much of interest. Thank you.ydoethur said:
If you think I'm leftish, God help you, as not that long ago I was a fairly dependable Conservative although I was never a party member and voted for other parties as and when I saw fit.Omnium said:
I think you're leftish. I'm sure you're really quite informed on history. I have recently read a book or two on the Korean war. Harsh times of course, but Atlee really doesn't look good. I'd also formed a less praiseworthy picture from other sources. I'm interested as to whether you think Atlee is over-regarded.ydoethur said:
Churchill was bald by 1951, also very deaf.Heathener said:Was Clement Attlee the last bald man to win an election? In 1950?
I think there is a tendency to be starry eyed about Attlee simply because he was regarded by the left as not only Labour's most successful leader until recently but in many ways the only truly successful one who totally changed the terms of economic discourse in this country for decades.
However, quite a lot of that would have happened anyway, and his government contained some pretty nasty human beings, the likes of Dalton, Shinwell and Bevan who quite openly made policy based on punishing those they hated (those with any money) not based on sound governance. Which had a number of disastrous side effects including the blowing of huge sums of Marshal aid as current account expenditure on economically unremunerative ventures e.g. the NHS when they could have been spent on repairing war damage. Ironically, that's much the same thing Labour (and Harold Macmillan) later accused Thatcher of doing with North Sea Oil and the profits from selling nationalised industry.
At the same time, they achieved a very great deal of their programme - however flawed it was - against a ticking clock and facing very difficult circumstances, including the unwinding of Britain's war debts, the winter of 1946-47 followed by the harvest failures of the later 1940s, the beginning of the Cold War which stretched Britain militarily and the increasing pressure from the colonies for independence at this moment. That's no small achievement.
Overall, like most governments, the record is mixed. Whether for good or ill, however, they did change Britain very considerably. And they wouldn't have done it without Attlee's diplomatic skill in keeping the government of Bevan, Bevin, Morrison, Dalton, Cripps and Ede, who all hated each other, together and functioning.
For that, he probably does deserve to be ranked alongside Thatcher as the most impactful postwar PM.
Hope that is of interest.
Somehow Churchill and Atlee messed up in a big way. I don't quite get how.
2 -
You mean all 5 of themHYUFD said:
Even if Sunak won the leadership and somehow scraped a win at the next general election then yes Boris loyalists would make his life he'll with rebellions in the subsequent Parliament as Thatcherite rebels made Major's life hell from 1992 to 1997Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w0 -
Yeah - which shit for brains appointed that closet socialist as Chancellor?HYUFD said:Rees Mogg lays into Sunak tonight calling him 'the high tax Chancellor of a low tax party'
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1545495803309035520?s=20&t=Hkrayn5myVcMmAbISYCotw3 -
In fact you are right JRM has criticised Sunak before. I assume you criticised him in turn for doing so, since Sunak was the Chancellor and operating under agreement of the Prime Minister (there is no chance - none - that the PM did not sign off on policy), and other members of the Cabinet should not be publicly criticising their colleagues I am sure you will agree. And a constitutionalist like JRM should have cared about collective responsibility too.HYUFD said:
Rees Mogg criticised Sunak before. In some respects Sunak, a slick liberal ex banker, has more in common with Emmanuel Macron than Margaret Thatcherkle4 said:
Who he was happy to support mere days ago. And if he was not, he is claiming Boris was a terrible PM because he would be admitting Boris could not control his own Chancellor.HYUFD said:Rees Mogg lays into Sunak tonight calling him 'the high tax Chancellor of a low tax party'
https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1545495803309035520?s=20&t=Hkrayn5myVcMmAbISYCotw
Which do you think it is - is he lying about thinking Sunak is terrible, or is he admitting Boris was terrible?
You've persuaded me, JRM was being traitorous to Boris's government by publicly departing from the agreed position of the Prime Minister.2 -
Go in dry. I think he likes it better raw.boulay said:
It’s clearly no secret. I never ever was interested in a man even after five years in dormitories at boarding school but you ride up here on your horse, topless, dripping masculinity and all I want to do is lube myself up and fuck you in the arse.KevinB said:
Do you secretly fancy me boulayboulay said:I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
And Kevin is seriously in the closet.
Who knew you could turn people so easily?1 -
Only 12 years and 1242 pages to go to match the thread on Jambo Kickback…Carnyx said:
Dutch Antilles.FrancisUrquhart said:Guess away
0 -
You are far too kind to such scum as Kev.Northern_Al said:
Yes, she had loads of boyfriends, but they were idiots so we forced her onto a lesbian conversion therapy course, which did the trick.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Wanker.0 -
WTAF? Are you even remotely serious? What is next? Conversion therapy or worse?KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?2 -
Your guess of the Dutch Antilles is good. St Maarten? Curaçao?Carnyx said:
LOoks like a fabric canopy roof over a seaside restaurant. But I bow to your expertise.Leon said:What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?
0 -
TBF @Leon is also now eschewing punctuation, so we can’t be sure it’s not just him having a bit of fun.Cookie said:
Didn't the last sockpuppet but two go down exactly this line? Also punctuated exactly the same.KevinB said:
Do you secretly fancy me boulayboulay said:I don’t understand why anyone is bothering arguing with KevinB/MickTrain.
It’s the whole MO - try and cause dissent over things that we disagree with but not to the level that is something that’s such an issue in Russia.
He can poke about sexual freedoms, gay marriage, general politics and then eventually some news agency in Russia is reporting that a “major” (yes I know) political discussion forum in the UK where politicians are known to post is full of people who reject the western liberal view.
Give Kevin/Gary/Mick a few posts to embarrass themselves then shut them down as it’s not being done for no reason.
And Kevin is seriously in the closet.0 -
Obviously not representative of wider public opinion, but Sunak is going down like a bucket of sick on MailOnline comments tonight. I don't think he is electable. Starmer can beat him.jonny83 said:
Problematic in that one leader can say 'I wasn't fined, but he was' in a general election contest. It won't be the only factor but it all adds up, including a cost of living crisis.Cookie said:
They didn't directly - but partygate is where he lost the country.boulay said:
I’m going to let you into a little secret, only known in the inner circles of the upper echelons of the Tory party. They didn’t remove Boris because of the FPN….HYUFD said:
How can the Tories having effectively removed Boris for being fined in lockdown replace him with Sunak, who was also fined in lockdown at the same event too?Leon said:Watched the Rishi vid. Not bad. The Tories could do worse. He’s got more charm and charisma than Starmer, but he’s no Boris, for good or ill
My god he is tiny tho. A leprechaun of a man
i think people might forgive the wealth stuff, as at least it makes him incorruptible. And he has an excellent backstory about immigration and social mobility. It will be quite hard for Labour to fight him, because any outright attacks might look like racism
All in all, a pretty good choice. I agree it will probably end up as Sunak V Truss or Mordaunt
But I don't think Rishi is anything like as tainted. The perception of Rishi is not one of a party animal. And Rishi was notable in being one of the more reluctant to impose restrictions.
Still mildly problematic, of course.
Sunak might be the MPs choice but I don't see him beating Starmer in a GE. People underestimate Starmer and downplay the job he has done turning around Labour from the Corbyn years.1 -
So, when you use the words 'lost the argument', what exactly do you mean?KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
Because from where I'm sitting, which I admit is one of the nicer parts of LA, you've made up a whole bunch of shit about how people actually hate homosexuality and lie to pollsters, and then are so brainwashed that they vote in favour of gay marriage at the ballot box.
You also wrote about how when you look at gay wedding photos (and I admit, I've never closely stared at the Groom's parents in a gay wedding photo), then there's terrible look behind their eyes.
When did you first develop this obsession?3 -
oh wheres the kindness and tolerance gone.....SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You are far too kind to such scum.Northern_Al said:
Yes, she had loads of boyfriends, but they were idiots so we forced her onto a lesbian conversion therapy course, which did the trick.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Wanker.0 -
Didn't know Hearts had played there?sarissa said:
Only 12 years and 1242 pages to go to match the thread on Jambo Kickback…Carnyx said:
Dutch Antilles.FrancisUrquhart said:Guess away
0 -
If I were Sunak I run from that endorsement. Who would want it now? Cummings was popular with those who used to hate him because he could dish dirt on Boris, but what Tory faction would trust his view?HYUFD said:
Cummings will be for Sunak no questionLuckyguy1983 said:
I support bringing him down before that happens. Just not up to it. No solutions.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
So I'm glad JRM is firing NLaws at his campaign. I want Nadine to say some sharp words about the price of milk too.
I am actually really really interested in the views of these parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians:
Dominic Cummings
Lord Frost
Theresa May
Boris Johnson
David Davis
Their preferences I think would tell us a lot.3 -
Stuck.Leon said:
Your guess of the Dutch Antilles is good. St Maarten? Curaçao?Carnyx said:
LOoks like a fabric canopy roof over a seaside restaurant. But I bow to your expertise.Leon said:What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?
0 -
Thank you. Though I'd like to think we're nothing special and that all decent parents would support their kids in whatever (reasonable) decisions they made.nico679 said:
Your daughter is very lucky to have such a wonderful supportive family . Bless you and thanks for such an inspiring post .Northern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Mind you, we're quite a "woke" extended family as well, so we have our weaknesses.....4 -
Airport terminal building.Leon said:What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?
I think a lot of you will have all seen this place on your tv.0 -
To succeed a new leader has to gain control of an angry party. That means they either have to be supported by or dominate the right wing. Ideally both. That is the price of entry.
Sunak has a target on his back. Can he dominate the right? I doubt it.
1 -
Will it rectalfy the situation?RochdalePioneers said:Not sure what's going on with @KevinB but there is a solution - one up the bum, no harm done.
Don't knock it til you've tried it1 -
Um. It's not Hawaii airport. Or not recently anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:
Airport terminal building.Leon said:What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?
I think a lot of you will have all seen this place on your tv.
0 -
Things are moving very quickly - I don't think anyone can really afford to wait any longer before making their position known. Maybe over the weekend can be managed, the formal rules will be announced then, but MPs want to get to the final two quick, and need to know who is serious.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Wishful thinking I am afraidJonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
They are over
And for clarification I am not opposed to Wallace but I am not convinced he is going to stand
And who do they even sound out when half the people you sound out are sounding you out about their own run?1 -
But I don't think Sunak would bring Cummings back.HYUFD said:
Cummings will be for Sunak no questionLuckyguy1983 said:
I support bringing him down before that happens. Just not up to it. No solutions.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
So I'm glad JRM is firing NLaws at his campaign. I want Nadine to say some sharp words about the price of milk too.
I am actually really really interested in the views of these parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians:
Dominic Cummings
Lord Frost
Theresa May
Boris Johnson
David Davis
Their preferences I think would tell us a lot.0 -
Think of where all the bright young things in the last Labour cabinet are now, who passed on the opportunity to challenge Brown at the end of Labour's last period in government.Jim_Miller said:Would it make sense for a Conservative candidate for PM to decide to skip this contest? (Assuming they are young enough.)
I am no seer, but it seems to me that the successful candidate is likely to have a short and miserable couple of years in Number 10, lose a general election, and then be replaced as leader.
But let me know if this strategy is implausible. Or if none of the potential candidates would think like that.
You don't get to choose the timing of your opportunity in politics. You take it, and make the most of it, or you miss out.4 -
He also needs a party desperate to move to the centre after years in opposition to win a general election again, which Blair and Cameron and arguably now Starmer benefit from and he wouldn'tJonathan said:To succeed a new leader has to gain control of an angry party. That means they either have to be supported by or dominate the right wing. Ideally both. That is the price of entry.
Sunak has a target on his back. Can he dominate the right? I doubt it.0 -
Here’s a pic that can definitely be guessed, if you have the right zoological knowledge and you check the species and the terrain. Taken in 2013 or so, hence the poor quality (apols)
0 -
Ah, so when George Rekers - founder of the anti-LGBT Family Research Council - decided to book a male escort off RentBoy.com, it was because he was targeted?KevinB said:
i honestly think because they were so high profile in their opposition they could well have been targetedrcs1000 said:
It's remarkable how many pastors and politicians who made their careers out of railing against homosexuality turned out to be secretly gay.Nigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
Here's just a few:
George Rekers
Steve Wiles
Ted Haggard
Glenn Murphy Jr
How exactly does this targeting work?
And are you saying that actually everyone is gay, and that all that needs to happen is for someone to be targeted and suddenly they're calling up rent boys for orgies?1 -
You know not the meaning of the words. You insult a man's daughter to his virtual face. You are slime.KevinB said:
oh wheres the kindness and tolerance gone.....SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You are far too kind to such scum.Northern_Al said:
Yes, she had loads of boyfriends, but they were idiots so we forced her onto a lesbian conversion therapy course, which did the trick.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Wanker.1 -
Right, that rules Sunak out. He would clearly be terrible.HYUFD said:
Cummings will be for Sunak no questionLuckyguy1983 said:
I support bringing him down before that happens. Just not up to it. No solutions.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
So I'm glad JRM is firing NLaws at his campaign. I want Nadine to say some sharp words about the price of milk too.
I am actually really really interested in the views of these parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians:
Dominic Cummings
Lord Frost
Theresa May
Boris Johnson
David Davis
Their preferences I think would tell us a lot.
Who's next on the list?1 -
Unless he can get overwhelming MP support, perhaps getting Truss backing him, I think they will have enough anger at him to scupper him with members.Jonathan said:To succeed a new leader has to gain control of an angry party. That means they either have to be supported by or dominate the right wing. Ideally both. That is the price of entry.
Sunak has a target on his back. Can he dominate the right? I doubt it.0 -
Hope notLuckyguy1983 said:
But I don't think Sunak would bring Cummings back.HYUFD said:
Cummings will be for Sunak no questionLuckyguy1983 said:
I support bringing him down before that happens. Just not up to it. No solutions.Jonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
So I'm glad JRM is firing NLaws at his campaign. I want Nadine to say some sharp words about the price of milk too.
I am actually really really interested in the views of these parliamentarians and non-parliamentarians:
Dominic Cummings
Lord Frost
Theresa May
Boris Johnson
David Davis
Their preferences I think would tell us a lot.0 -
Curaçao i think is the closest (but incorrect) guess so far.0
-
Bit harsh.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You know not the meaning of the words. You insult a man's daughter to his virtual face. You are slime.KevinB said:
oh wheres the kindness and tolerance gone.....SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You are far too kind to such scum.Northern_Al said:
Yes, she had loads of boyfriends, but they were idiots so we forced her onto a lesbian conversion therapy course, which did the trick.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Wanker.
Without primordial slime, none of us would be here. It was very useful stuff.2 -
Plausible - but equally, they might never get the chance to be PM again.Jim_Miller said:Would it make sense for a Conservative candidate for PM to decide to skip this contest? (Assuming they are young enough.)
I am no seer, but it seems to me that the successful candidate is likely to have a short and miserable couple of years in Number 10, lose a general election, and then be replaced as leader.
But let me know if this strategy is implausible. Or if none of the potential candidates would think like that.
And if they don’t get the gig, which is likely the case just on the law of averages, they’ve at least raised their profile.
So why not run ?0 -
I said it last time,I'll say it again.rcs1000 said:
Ah, so when George Rekers - founder of the anti-LGBT Family Research Council - decided to book a male escort off RentBoy.com, it was because he was targeted?KevinB said:
i honestly think because they were so high profile in their opposition they could well have been targetedrcs1000 said:
It's remarkable how many pastors and politicians who made their careers out of railing against homosexuality turned out to be secretly gay.Nigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
Here's just a few:
George Rekers
Steve Wiles
Ted Haggard
Glenn Murphy Jr
How exactly does this targeting work?
And are you saying that actually everyone is gay, and that all that needs to happen is for someone to be targeted and suddenly they're calling up rent boys for orgies?
His arguments are distinctly queer.0 -
I mean when weve bern treated to Labour leaderships featuring magic grandpa versus Owen Smith, that time they put Diane Abbott up, the Miliband family comedy troup and not forgetting Rebecca Long Bailey they cant be 'too' badBig_G_NorthWales said:
You may be surprisedBeibheirli_C said:
What astounds me is the appalling "quality" of the candidates. I know that Boris is accused of surrounding himself with low quality wannabes and has-beens but is this lot really all that is available?Leon said:My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
There is no way that any of this shower will lead the Tories to victory at the next election.0 -
Whiskey Bay?FrancisUrquhart said:Curaçao i think is the closest (but incorrect) guess so far.
0 -
Galapagos? The gannet/booby plus sealions - not many other places with sealions in hot climates. (Apart from the Cape of Good Hope.)Leon said:Here’s a pic that can definitely be guessed, if you have the right zoological knowledge and you check the species and the terrain. Taken in 2013 or so, hence the poor quality (apols)
0 -
I don't have the right zoological knowledge but there are formations like that on the GalapagosLeon said:Here’s a pic that can definitely be guessed, if you have the right zoological knowledge and you check the species and the terrain. Taken in 2013 or so, hence the poor quality (apols)
0 -
My outsiders nose senses a Tory party that fancies a bit of dry, simple Thatcherite economics.HYUFD said:
He also needs a party desperate to move to the centre after years in opposition to win a general election again, which Blair and Cameron and arguably now Starmer benefit from and he wouldn'tJonathan said:To succeed a new leader has to gain control of an angry party. That means they either have to be supported by or dominate the right wing. Ideally both. That is the price of entry.
Sunak has a target on his back. Can he dominate the right? I doubt it.1 -
i was talking about gay marriage not homosexuality in general...i agree very few people want to make it illegal that would be wrong....but questioning the acceptance of gay marriage by the majority of people is not homophobia....there is a differencercs1000 said:
So, when you use the words 'lost the argument', what exactly do you mean?KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
Because from where I'm sitting, which I admit is one of the nicer parts of LA, you've made up a whole bunch of shit about how people actually hate homosexuality and lie to pollsters, and then are so brainwashed that they vote in favour of gay marriage at the ballot box.
You also wrote about how when you look at gay wedding photos (and I admit, I've never closely stared at the Groom's parents in a gay wedding photo), then there's terrible look behind their eyes.
When did you first develop this obsession?
I know theres lots of gays in LA so obviously when you say everyone has gay friends that may be true in LA...its not true in much of the red wall
Also i do think many people think things like Pride month are counterproductive for the gay movement
But mainly im in favour of love0 -
Crudely, they didn't have the money to achieve what they wanted to achieve, or the patience to wait until they could raise it by sustainable means, or the willingness to modernise effectively that would lead to economic growth later.Omnium said:
It is very much of interest. Thank you.ydoethur said:
If you think I'm leftish, God help you, as not that long ago I was a fairly dependable Conservative although I was never a party member and voted for other parties as and when I saw fit.Omnium said:
I think you're leftish. I'm sure you're really quite informed on history. I have recently read a book or two on the Korean war. Harsh times of course, but Atlee really doesn't look good. I'd also formed a less praiseworthy picture from other sources. I'm interested as to whether you think Atlee is over-regarded.ydoethur said:
Churchill was bald by 1951, also very deaf.Heathener said:Was Clement Attlee the last bald man to win an election? In 1950?
I think there is a tendency to be starry eyed about Attlee simply because he was regarded by the left as not only Labour's most successful leader until recently but in many ways the only truly successful one who totally changed the terms of economic discourse in this country for decades.
However, quite a lot of that would have happened anyway, and his government contained some pretty nasty human beings, the likes of Dalton, Shinwell and Bevan who quite openly made policy based on punishing those they hated (those with any money) not based on sound governance. Which had a number of disastrous side effects including the blowing of huge sums of Marshal aid as current account expenditure on economically unremunerative ventures e.g. the NHS when they could have been spent on repairing war damage. Ironically, that's much the same thing Labour (and Harold Macmillan) later accused Thatcher of doing with North Sea Oil and the profits from selling nationalised industry.
At the same time, they achieved a very great deal of their programme - however flawed it was - against a ticking clock and facing very difficult circumstances, including the unwinding of Britain's war debts, the winter of 1946-47 followed by the harvest failures of the later 1940s, the beginning of the Cold War which stretched Britain militarily and the increasing pressure from the colonies for independence at this moment. That's no small achievement.
Overall, like most governments, the record is mixed. Whether for good or ill, however, they did change Britain very considerably. And they wouldn't have done it without Attlee's diplomatic skill in keeping the government of Bevan, Bevin, Morrison, Dalton, Cripps and Ede, who all hated each other, together and functioning.
For that, he probably does deserve to be ranked alongside Thatcher as the most impactful postwar PM.
Hope that is of interest.
Somehow Churchill and Atlee messed up in a big way. I don't quite get how.
There were other factors involved, but that's at the root of most of it.
Arguably, it's a problem that continues to bedevil us to this day.1 -
Good point - my sincere apologies to slime, totally uncalled for to associate with Kydoethur said:
Bit harsh.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You know not the meaning of the words. You insult a man's daughter to his virtual face. You are slime.KevinB said:
oh wheres the kindness and tolerance gone.....SeaShantyIrish2 said:
You are far too kind to such scum.Northern_Al said:
Yes, she had loads of boyfriends, but they were idiots so we forced her onto a lesbian conversion therapy course, which did the trick.KevinB said:
im happy for your daughter and of course you are proud of her...did she ever have a boyfriend by the wayNorthern_Al said:
I try to avoid doing personal on here, but you're provocative, so....KevinB said:
thats the standard trope used when people have lost the argument re homosexualityNigelb said:
You’re beginning to sound a tad… obsessive.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
That’s very, very occasionally a sign that someone’s repressing something.
and actually repression aint a bad thing civilizarion is built on it
sometimes i feel like killing someone but i wont do it
maybe i would fancy a gay orgy in my house but i wouldnt....repression you see it can be a good thing
My daughter's gay. She's getting married shortly to a beautiful (in every sense of the word) woman. I, and the rest of the family, are immensely proud of her, and are really excited and looking forward to the wedding. As a parent, I've found it very rewarding to have a daughter with a different sexuality from my own, and have learnt a lot.
By contrast, your homophobia means you're missing out on the rich variety of human life. Though it may be that it's just gay men you've got a thing about?
Wanker.
Without primordial slime, none of us would be here. It was very useful stuff.0 -
-
Probably got lost on the way back from South Morocco (in-joke)Carnyx said:
Didn't know Hearts had played there?sarissa said:
Only 12 years and 1242 pages to go to match the thread on Jambo Kickback…Carnyx said:
Dutch Antilles.FrancisUrquhart said:Guess away
1 -
Yes, for me it is a bit like when people talked about it being better for Labour if Boris was in place than if they took him down (similar things been said about other leaders and oppositions) because a new leader might do better.Nigelb said:
Plausible - but equally, they might never get the chance to be PM again.Jim_Miller said:Would it make sense for a Conservative candidate for PM to decide to skip this contest? (Assuming they are young enough.)
I am no seer, but it seems to me that the successful candidate is likely to have a short and miserable couple of years in Number 10, lose a general election, and then be replaced as leader.
But let me know if this strategy is implausible. Or if none of the potential candidates would think like that.
And if they don’t get the gig, which is likely the case just on the law of averages, they’ve at least raised their profile.
So why not run ?
It could be true, but always better to seek the win, which makes you look successful.
Or classic 'good election to lose' talk, but ultimately you never know you might be able to manage better than expected - people speculated about it being better to be out of office during austerity.
Rishi and the others may not get another chance, and if they don't and the party loses, they may not get to be PM for 7+ years anyway.1 -
Easter Island?Leon said:0 -
I gtg. This has been fun. I hope I can scroll back tomorrow to find out where @FrancisUrquhart 's pic is from.
Edit and as @Leon 's is not Galapagos, his too.0 -
And quite a few MPs seem to have been sounding out Wallace to see if he’ll run. It’s now (certainly this weekend) or never.kle4 said:
Things are moving very quickly - I don't think anyone can really afford to wait any longer before making their position known. Maybe over the weekend can be managed, the formal rules will be announced then, but MPs want to get to the final two quick, and need to know who is serious.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Wishful thinking I am afraidJonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
They are over
And for clarification I am not opposed to Wallace but I am not convinced he is going to stand
And who do they even sound out when half the people you sound out are sounding you out about their own run?0 -
It would have to be Easter Island, in that case. Or Crusoe's one, if not the SA mainland.Leon said:0 -
FrancisUrquhart said:
Curaçao i think is the closest (but incorrect) guess so far.
Thats Bognor Regis. Definitely. They are Bognor seals.Leon said:Here’s a pic that can definitely be guessed, if you have the right zoological knowledge and you check the species and the terrain. Taken in 2013 or so, hence the poor quality (apols)
If it isnt then is it Ipswich?1 -
Pm Truss
FO Wallace
CoE Redwood
HSec Mourdant0 -
Labour's candidates were appalling too and for much the same reason. Corbyn surrounded himself with those who were no danger to him, just like Johnson. Anyone with talent was purged if they threatened The Leader.wooliedyed said:
I mean when weve bern treated to Labour leaderships featuring magic grandpa versus Owen Smith, that time they put Diane Abbott up, the Miliband family comedy troup and not forgetting Rebecca Long Bailey they cant be 'too' badBig_G_NorthWales said:
You may be surprisedBeibheirli_C said:
What astounds me is the appalling "quality" of the candidates. I know that Boris is accused of surrounding himself with low quality wannabes and has-beens but is this lot really all that is available?Leon said:My family WhatsApp, which is quite rightwing (but with greens and lefties too) has gone from accepting the departure of Boris to OMFG look at these idiots (the potential replacements) and Can we have Boris back
There is no way that any of this shower will lead the Tories to victory at the next election.
Corbyn and Johnson were opposite cheeks of the same ar*e and the pair of them have polluted the politics of this country.0 -
The 1922 campaign don't announce the timetable until next week. The middle of next week is fine.Nigelb said:
And quite a few MPs seem to have been sounding out Wallace to see if he’ll run. It’s now (certainly this weekend) or never.kle4 said:
Things are moving very quickly - I don't think anyone can really afford to wait any longer before making their position known. Maybe over the weekend can be managed, the formal rules will be announced then, but MPs want to get to the final two quick, and need to know who is serious.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Wishful thinking I am afraidJonathan said:
If you elect Sunak it will seriously divide the Tory party. Boris’ gang will bring him down. They have form.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Excellent forward planning - exactly what we want - not someone winging itHYUFD said:Guido exclusive tonight, Sunak had his campaign website registered as early as last December
https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1545453882930827264?s=20&t=1ak5T3Au964YuhJtLLhT1w
They are over
And for clarification I am not opposed to Wallace but I am not convinced he is going to stand
And who do they even sound out when half the people you sound out are sounding you out about their own run?
If he was ruling himself out he would likely have done so already. Wallace will spend the weekend creating his campaign team and announce by the middle of next week0 -
Death in Paradise? Deshaies On Guadeloupe?FrancisUrquhart said:
Airport terminal building.Leon said:What’s that weird red thing at the bottom right off the @FrancisUrquhart photo? A downed aircraft? A grounded boat?
I think a lot of you will have all seen this place on your tv.0 -
FrancisUrquhart said:
Curaçao i think is the closest (but incorrect) guess so far.
The Colombian coast? So we would have seen it in Narcos etc?
This is a hard one0 -
And the ban hammer is wielded...
They never learn, do they?1 -
It's not far off it seems.CatMan said:
The guy in that looks like Richard Tyndall...kle4 said:
Congratulations on your psychic abilities to tell what people are thinking.KevinB said:
dunno i often spot in gay marriage photos the grooms parents with forced smiles looking distinctly uncomfortable...as in social pressure tells us we should be happy but is this what we really want for our son....check gay wedding photos you will see what i meanBig_G_NorthWales said:
We have and it was a lovely occasionLostPassword said:
I haven't been invited to a gay wedding, but loads of people must have gone to one, and it's hard to see how my heterosexual marriage has been damaged by them. I can understand why a large minority were uncomfortable about the change, but it must only be a very small minority that would support reversing it now.Andy_Cooke said:
One key issue about changing it: to roll back gay marriage, you have to annul and undo hundreds of thousands of marriages. Including reversing the legal ramifications such as next of kin aspects and inheritances, including inheritances that have already happened.JosiasJessop said:
I see what you mean, but I think that's a poor framing. Social conventions were working against gays, but it is not working 'for' them now. What has happened is that many, if not most, people simply do not care. The conventions are not working 'for' them; the conventions just don't care.Casino_Royale said:
I think it's far more simple than that: it's social proof and convention.Andy_Cooke said:Of course, KevinB has rather missed an enormous logic hole in his fantasy.
He's been assuring us that the oldest voters are sufficiently against gay marriage to be supportive of overturning it. And whilst over-65s are the still net in favour, they are the least accepting age group.
However, there's an issue with relying on the over-65s group providing your core support 30+ years from now. I wonder if he can spot it.
(And the possible loophole that maybe people become more anti-gay-marriage as they age has not been seen at all; if anything, they've been going the other way. And each echelon has been retaining their pro-gay-marriage bias as they age into the next age group. Understandable, really, the adage that people become more conservative as they age tends to be by viewing whatever was the default when they were younger as being how things should be in future - and thirty years from now, most people will have had gay marriage as being normal for a long long time)
It was working against gay people and now it works for them.
That can change, and change quickly, as the Supreme Court decision has started to roll things back and reopen debate in the USA and here.
That's great IMO, as it is equality.
But you are correct that that could change, and perhaps rapidly.
Massive issue.
Besides, some people have awkward looking smiles anyway
Scott Meyer - I highly recommend his web series basic instructions, which he has recently started up again, very funny.1 -
Galapagos! Which one, I cannot guess...Leon said:Here’s a pic that can definitely be guessed, if you have the right zoological knowledge and you check the species and the terrain. Taken in 2013 or so, hence the poor quality (apols)
1 -
Poor John. Very sad that he hasn't even been drafted in as supply in Bojo's caretaker cabinet.Jonathan said:Pm Truss
FO Wallace
CoE Redwood
HSec Mourdant0