Jump to content

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, WestCountryGirl said:

... ... ... say what now?

I don’t mean it as an endorsement of him but he is effective at public speaking. It’s partly why some people have been taken in by him I think. He shows confidence, can effectively use his tactics and can galvanise his own support base. I think there’s a difference between being charismatic and being a good public speaker.

*these words are not an endorsement of President Trump 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

I don’t mean it as an endorsement of him but he is effective at public speaking. It’s partly why some people have been taken in by him I think. He shows confidence, can effectively use his tactics and can galvanise his own support base. I think there’s a difference between being charismatic and being a good public speaker.

*these words are not an endorsement of President Trump 😉

he knows how to work a crowd of MAGAs for sure...he's definitely not conventional and some people love him for that.

I just think he's a massive c**t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

I don’t mean it as an endorsement of him but he is effective at public speaking. It’s partly why some people have been taken in by him I think. He shows confidence, can effectively use his tactics and can galvanise his own support base. I think there’s a difference between being charismatic and being a good public speaker.

*these words are not an endorsement of President Trump 😉

I guess I see your point. Like many others I have had a terrible habit of muting or turning off the TV at any point in the last five years when he appears, so I only have the reports of others to go off with regard to his lack of ability to string sentences together or complete a coherent thought.

I suppose if coherent thoughts aren't important to you and you just want to hear the man in charge say vaguely racist shit and inspire three word catchphrases that you can chant, then yes, he's great at what he does!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, WestCountryGirl said:

I guess I see your point. Like many others I have had a terrible habit of muting or turning off the TV at any point in the last five years when he appears, so I only have the reports of others to go off with regard to his lack of ability to string sentences together or complete a coherent thought.

I suppose if coherent thoughts aren't important to you and you just want to hear the man in charge say vaguely racist shit and inspire three word catchphrases that you can chant, then yes, he's great at what he does!

Trust me I don’t agree with that he says and I don’t like his style at all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Bristol currently has low rates. Students don't really come back here until a couple of weeks time.

Will be interesting. ;) 

Anywhere that hasn't had students back yet has a get out of jail free card that they need to cash in pretty soon. Madness if they let them back, especially those from up here 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr.Tease said:

I'm not so sure, I think the strategy is to turn off casual voters by making it as obnoxious and alienating and confusing as possible (they default to 'all politicians are liars/politics is grim' and end up not voting) and fire up the enthusiasm among  zealots and far right wingers who didn't use to vote but do now. Trump voters are more enthusiastic and likely to vote than Biden's. Boris Johnson had the same tactics last election, I think. 

The recent Tory strategy I'm most reminded of is 2015, where the right wing machine spent an awful lot of time and money amplifying the view that "all politicians, they're all the same" and claiming that your vote won't make a difference. I remember just how often Russell bloody Brand was on TV making that exact point. On Reddit and Twitter this morning there are a lot of several week old accounts, especially in more left leaning spaces, trying to make the argument that this debate shows that neither Trump nor Biden are good, that politics is broken and that there is no route to fix it.

There is clearly evidence that this strategy lowers turnout and this benefits right wing parties. The thing is, it must be much easier to make people think that voting is less important when you have bland, unthreatening David "oh, I go to Latitude and shop at Waitrose" Cameron, rather than the guy explicitly sending out commands to a white nationalist militia group.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Toilet Duck thank you for your time in sharing your expertise and knowledge on here I know so many people find it useful!! I’m not the brightest spark when it comes to science so I don’t understand a lot of it but as people discuss I’m beginning to grasp very small parts!! My interest and knowledge is human behaviours so am able to link to this in a small way! Thank you again for sharing! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Apparently there's some stuff going on in parliament today with Brady amendment but I'll be fucked if I can understand any of it.

It's the renewal of the Coronavirus Act, and several Tory MPs want the Brady amendment voted on which will give Parliament a say (debate & vote) over ay new restrictions that get put in place. Apparently 80 Tory MPs support the Brady amendment. However it's unlikely that the Speaker will select the amendment as this is just the renewal of an existing law so it goes against convention to add a new amendment to existing law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, funkychick2007 said:

@Toilet Duck thank you for your time in sharing your expertise and knowledge on here I know so many people find it useful!! I’m not the brightest spark when it comes to science so I don’t understand a lot of it but as people discuss I’m beginning to grasp very small parts!! My interest and knowledge is human behaviours so am able to link to this in a small way! Thank you again for sharing! 

No problem at all, you are most welcome! As I've said many times before, I really don't have all the answers, it's an exceptionally complex and dynamic situation we find ourselves in, but if it helps to have me ramble on a bit, I'll continue to do so!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ozanne said:

It's the renewal of the Coronavirus Act, and several Tory MPs want the Brady amendment voted on which will give Parliament a say (debate & vote) over ay new restrictions that get put in place. Apparently 80 Tory MPs support the Brady amendment. However it's unlikely that the Speaker will select the amendment as this is just the renewal of an existing law so it goes against convention to add a new amendment to existing law.

ok...but govt likely do a deal anyway to give parliament more say?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

It's the renewal of the Coronavirus Act, and several Tory MPs want the Brady amendment voted on which will give Parliament a say (debate & vote) over ay new restrictions that get put in place. Apparently 80 Tory MPs support the Brady amendment. However it's unlikely that the Speaker will select the amendment as this is just the renewal of an existing law so it goes against convention to add a new amendment to existing law.

The speaker won’t pick it but the government are trying to do a deal with the rebels because its politically difficult to say the least for a Tory PM to face a rebellion by the men in grey suits. 

Edited by Fuzzy Afro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

ok...but govt likely do a deal anyway to give parliament more say?

They'll possibly try to cut a deal but Ministers don't want to give too much power away and lose the ability to impose measures quickly when/if they need to. Whether that is enough to placate their own MPs remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, steviewevie said:

ok...but govt likely do a deal anyway to give parliament more say?

There’s pretty much no reason not to offer a retrospective vote on restrictions. It’s an easy concession for the government. If the government and CMO/CSA agree a particular restriction is needed then it’s very hard to see the Tory rebels AND the opposition benches slapping something down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Fuzzy Afro said:

The speaker won’t pick up but the government are trying to do a deal with the rebels because its politically difficult to say the least for a Tory PM to face a rebellion by the men in grey suits. 

trouble is for these tory MPs who want more say and want fewer restrictions, opposition MPs likely to either support govt restrictions or to want more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ozanne said:

They'll possibly try to cut a deal but Ministers don't want to give too much power away and lose the ability to impose measures quickly when/if they need to. Whether that is enough to placate their own MPs remains to be seen.

 

 

Just now, Ozanne said:

They'll possibly try to cut a deal but Ministers don't want to give too much power away and lose the ability to impose measures quickly when/if they need to. Whether that is enough to placate their own MPs remains to be seen.


Deal will almost certainly be a retrospective vote. So ministers can change the rules at short notice but they automatically expire after 7 days if parliament hasn’t approved them. Hard to see parliament voting to abolish a specific measure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...