norwaysaint

You know that Boris Johnson has also blocked Brexit, right?

You know that Boris Johnson has also blocked Brexit, right?

I often am. I mean, we are all biased towards saints when we watch football matches, also two horse races, but there are usually comments about the other team being well managed, having a strong defence or having certain stand-out players. When we discuss the other side in politics, it seems we feel obliged to say their leader is an idiot/****, everything they do is wrong and every member of their "team" is awful. If we think some of the football chat on here is laughable, the political chat is facile and naive, from both sides, with a few exceptions, including you. I've noted. Certain people on here, though, seem to be the political version of the fan wearing full replica kit and face paint, singing without irony that Southampton are by far the greatest team the world has ever seen.

Odd comment. I mentioned somewhere else the other day that Ings is about the only player who has generally been seen as doing a good job this season. I think the only criticism I've ever seen of him is for spending a lot of time out injured.

I would say that Corbyn will be disliked by most people whatever he says now. On the other hand, judging by posts on here, Johnson could do pretty much anything and get fanboy style worship from most tories. He's obviously doing something right to make his followers feel well represented. Discussion on here is like a parody of real life discussion though. I've never been chatting with people about politics in real life where there is never a single recognition that the other side has some merit in their argument. Here everything is black and white, right or wrong, stupid or intelligent, good or evil, a bit like the opinions people had when we were teenagers and knew everything. You probably need one hand to count the people who are able to understand the points of Conservative, Labour and the Liberals, without just putting their fingers in their ears and just shutting out all discussion. I think people consider being able to genuinely reconsider or examine other sides of an argument as a weakness. What a load of pony and trap, as our resident cockernee geezer would say.

It takes a few minutes to make guacamole, why are you buying it? So much better fresh.

What would people say are the main reasons that the libdems are failing to make any significant ground this time around, bearing in mind the general disdain people have for Corbyn and Johnson right now? This should have been their opportunity to make an impression. Is it mostly that people see the UK as effectively a two party system, a dislike of their policies, a dislike of Swinson, a hangover from the disappointment of the coalition, their Brexit stance or something else? Grown-up answers please, if you're up to it

I met a few people from here back in 2004 in Gothenburg. I don't remember a single name, so I have no idea whether they were "major" posters.

It was just meant to be a counter-point to the right's name calling. One of the main complaints I hear from right wing voters about the way left wing voters speak is that they generally tend to condescend. Sometimes I can see what they mean in the posts here. There isn't so much name calling, but there is often an attitude that right wing voters aren't quite at their level of maturity and intellect and that they only have their beliefs because of ignorance. Note that their main label for the left is "liberal elite", the people who think they are above everyone else. I don't think your post was intended that way, but it's an indirect insult, implying that they are how they are, that right=childish and left=mature adult. Personally, I'm left of centre, so I fall in that category myself. I'm often a condescending *****. I think I'm better than most people who disagree with me, so luckily, most will agree with that.

Not engaging is one thing and clearly a more mature approach. Making a point of commenting about how you're rising above their childish level are another thing, because they are, in themselves, engaging in the mud slinging.

Perhaps you were going for irony, but some might say a comment like that is pretty condescending, which kind of contradicts the point you were trying to make. It's just like name calling, but more indirect.

The other "Project Fear"? I think the left generally suffers from not being good enough at coming up with neat, snappy nicknames for the ideas they want to discredit. We see the same thing in America where Trump concentrates on negative nicknames for people and things he wants to discredit. It would be interesting to know why the right is, firstly, more engaged in nicknames and, secondly, why they are simply so much better at it. It does have a strong effect on public perception to hear these things repeated, whether you like it or not. Funny, seeing as most decent comedians and creative people are quite left wing, that the left aren't as creative or amusing with their put-downs.

I guess this would only be grounds for optimism if we'd been beaten after gutsy, battling displays where they had simply proved to be the better team. I haven't seen many games this season, but when I did, we looked clueless, poorly trained and indisciplined.

This one aged well.

Ron Davies was Welsh!

I think my suggestion was Shelton Neville Moore Des Walker Pearce Ball Gascoigne Gerrard Lineker Greaves Owen But I'd accept being called out on most of those. I never even saw Moore and Greaves play. Owen at the start was a devastating and exciting striker, no matter where his career went, but I could swap him with quite a few. Neville just seemed like a reliable choice, but nobody really liked him as a player. Walker could be swapped easily with about five other players. I think I'd only fight for keeping Lineker and Ball, who were exceptional at what they did.

That report seemed a bit badly written, so I checked the source. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/townhall/ I think I'll be discarding their reporting, thanks

... except Bridge.

I'd take Paine out and put Armstrong in. Not because he was better, but because I never saw Paine. All of them played in the eighties.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50413011 It's obviously the top voted players than a real team, as there's no real balance. Banks G. Neville - Ferdinand- Moore - Cole Beckham - Charlton - Gascoigne Lineker - Shearer - Greaves So, ex-saint Shilton misses out, but you can understand Banks getting that one. Keegan also misses out, but maybe wasn't quite the best in his position for England. Shearer gets in, but I would actually say he was a great English player, rather than a great England player. The crime for me is that Alan Ball isn't in there. I genuinely think he was the best player England have had doing that job. I know the inclusion of Ferdinand, Neville, Cole and Beckham will irritate a lot of people, but they were solid players for England over a pretty long period. Good arguments for a few others in their places though. Pearce was obviously more iconic and passionate than Cole, but not necessarily a more skilled left back.

36/37 I didn't really read the clues. When a certain nearby country was accepted under its most basic name, I assumed I had the republic covered. The smaller South American team was the result of a string of guesses though.

Without any doubt though, the one who is able to trigger most people on here is SOG. Never seen anything like it.

Every reaction is described as "being triggered" nowadays. It's awfully trendy. I think most posts on here are people being triggered by other people's views. I know mine are.

But you have to look at the facts. There is an interest in the population for politics further to the right. That's why the more right wing version of the conservative party is still, by a distance, the biggest individual party. They aren't losing that much support by doing it. There is, however, very little interest in the general population in a more left wing version of the labour party, which is why they ARE losing popularity. The liberals are able to take up some of the centre ground support both parties lose, but they are still going to have to fight to win a meaningful amount of seats. I think Corbyn and the move further left has thrown away a great chance for labour to get a victory. Boris and a move to the right, alondg with the dislike of Corbyn, has pretty much rescued the Conservatives at a time they could have been vulnerable. I think a lot of the mistrust of Corbyn has been manufactured by the media, but it doesn't stop it being there. You may not like it, but it seems to be the case. We'll see when the election comes, I guess.