The Reform Thread

[badgerx16]

29 minutes ago, whelk said:

Stupid comment then eh

No. There are degrees of self-interest.

No politician is successful and totally free of emcumbrance, even if it's just free tickets to the footy. Trump, however, takes milking his position to levels rarely seen outside dictatorships.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, egg said:

Different issues. We're talking political labelling. I won't stop calling a shovel a shovel. 

That makes sense. If it was labelling people you were taking issue with then it would have been tough not to call you a massive hypocrite.

[egg]

7 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

That makes sense. If it was labelling people you were taking issue with then it would have been tough not to call you a massive hypocrite.

Bless. Bad day poppet? 

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

 

You don’t call me far left because I am clearly not.

 

[sadoldgit]

Here you go Ralph. I wouldn’t normally spend an evening giving someone homework, but I think you need educating. I asked ChatGPT to give me a definition of far right ideology in the UK and this is what it says:-

Core characteristics -

The belief that political power and national identity should be centred around a particular ethnic, cultural or “native” group.

Often opposes immigration and multiculturalism. 

Favouring strict law enforcement, strong state powers and sometimes a belief in natural social hierarchies.

Claiming that the country is threatened by corrupt elites, global institutions or minority groups.

Opposition to Liberal democratic norms such as minority protections, independent institutions or equal civic status for different groups.

Hostility towards specific groups which may include xenophobia, Islamophobia or anti immigrant sentiment.

In extreme cases it includes racial supremacy or overt racism.

Tick many boxes?

No surprise to see a laughing emoji from nic. He ticks some of these boxes. 😂
 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 11:42 by sadoldgit

[badgerx16]

ChatGPT is a series of algorithms and sequences of computer coding, it is not 'intelligence'. Like all such AI ChatBots it is prone to mistakes, misreadings, and sometimes the generation of total random bullshit.

Anybody who uses such facilities as a fount of wisdom is a fool..

 

[Weston Super Saint]

2 hours ago, whelk said:

So Obama just as corrupt as Trump?

He wanted four more years despite knowing he was incapable of leading during his last year.

If that isn't the very definition of self serving snout in the trough then I don't know what is.

[hypochondriac]

11 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

He wanted four more years despite knowing he was incapable of leading during his last year.

If that isn't the very definition of self serving snout in the trough then I don't know what is.

Do you mean Biden?

[Weston Super Saint]

35 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Do you mean Biden?

Ah yes, read the wrong President 🤦

[Holmes_and_Watson]

    7 hours ago, @Sir Ralph said:

    So you think we are essentially far right. You really dont understand what far right is so I would recommend not using the term until you have read up on it and the history relating to far right regimes. 

    Whilst I would not say you fall within the definition of far left because I understand what that means, you certainly are not a liberal with a small L.  Just because we draw fire from liberals (or lefties as I call them) that doesnt mean we are far right, it means we disagree with some of the views that they have (this forum has a higher proportion of liberals). I dont call you far left even though I think some of your views are extreme. That's not how it works. You need to better understand what those terms mean before you call people that.

 

 

The SaintsWeb political spectrum works a little differently. 

There's the extreme left through the left where it meets up with The Guardian headlines. SOG is led pretty much by that. Anything not aligning to any of that position (even if it has changed) is a far right, flag raising, Neanderthal, Brexit loving racist.

In summary: Communist; Your Party; SOG; Reform/Robinson-Thug

When a number of us checked out where we were on a political graph a while back, all bar one of us were in the same general area. Plenty of scope on how each of us ended up there, with various views balancing out to give a single point. But lots of room for respectful discussion.

It's a good thing to see you take people as you find them. So, you can read the below and just continue to to do just that.

I'd been a long time lurker before being more active of late. So, I'd dip in and out. And that was nearly always the main board. I'd check out the lounge very sporadically. I found my view of SOG change considerably from reading isolated parts, to seeing full discussions from scratch.

I'd remembered some indecisive liberal positions. And I remember wondering why the response seemed heavy handed. Reading it from scratch, the individual posts didn't tie up with the loose liberal perspective. . And that's fine. Everyone is shaped by life events and experiences. No one expects flawless consistency.

What I wasn't expecting, but the others had already been through was the nature of some of the comments. On one hand self styled, liberal champion of empathy, tolerance and intelligence.

On the other was the poster most likely to use racist slurs. An anti Semite well before the latest Gaza conflict. Possibly the most intolerant to the thoughts of others poster we have. This is where all this Hopkins/Robinson stuff stems from. It's SOG's labelling of those who disagree. No one else had any interest in them. Decrying the lack of intelligence of others, leaning on a long career fighting knife crime, sexual assault and in journalism. Except he got caught out on the CPS own processes, showed a degree of victim disregard that would have got him transferred for his own personal safety and showed a willingness to believe or disbelieve legal outcomes as it suited. It turned out he had administrative rather than investigative duties. The crusading journalism? sales division, after clearly showing no journalistic investigative skills.

And no one would have cared less, or thought less of views for them being from that perspective. But the condescension and disregard for other equally valid views put plenty of people off well before me.  I leave you to discover the joys of Fantasy Mealtime, Nazi Belt Buckle Review and Distorted  On The Buses Bantz.

That political spectrum test showed us broadly where we were. SOGs the one who would fix his answers to the desired outcome, regardless of the actual opinions.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 22:28 by Holmes_and_Watson

[Gloucester Saint]

Farage is a cunt for trying to downplay this though - the word, and we all know what it is, hasn’t been acceptable at all in public use for far more than 20 years at least, more like 30, the same as other ‘colloquial’ words used for British Asian and Black people at that time. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpvd298wxvro

[AlexLaw76]

11 hours ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

    7 hours ago, @Sir Ralph said:

    So you think we are essentially far right. You really dont understand what far right is so I would recommend not using the term until you have read up on it and the history relating to far right regimes. 

    Whilst I would not say you fall within the definition of far left because I understand what that means, you certainly are not a liberal with a small L.  Just because we draw fire from liberals (or lefties as I call them) that doesnt mean we are far right, it means we disagree with some of the views that they have (this forum has a higher proportion of liberals). I dont call you far left even though I think some of your views are extreme. That's not how it works. You need to better understand what those terms mean before you call people that.

 

 

The SaintsWeb political spectrum works a little differently. 

There's the extreme left through the left where it meets up with The Guardian headlines. SOG is led pretty much by that. Anything not aligning to any of that position (even if it has changed) is a far right, flag raising, Neanderthal, Brexit loving racist.

In summary: Communist; Your Party; SOG; Reform/Robinson-Thug

When a number of us checked out where we were on a political graph a while back, all bar one of us were in the same general area. Plenty of scope on how each of us ended up there, with various views balancing out to give a single point. But lots of room for respectful discussion.

It's a good thing to see you take people as you find them. So, you can read the below and just continue to to do just that.

I'd been a long time lurker before being more active of late. So, I'd dip in and out. And that was nearly always the main board. I'd check out the lounge very sporadically. I found my view of SOG change considerably from reading isolated parts, to seeing full discussions from scratch.

I'd remembered some indecisive liberal positions. And I remember wondering why the response seemed heavy handed. Reading it from scratch, the individual posts didn't tie up with the loose liberal perspective. . And that's fine. Everyone is shaped by life events and experiences. No one expects flawless consistency.

What I wasn't expecting, but the others had already been through was the nature of some of the comments. On one hand self styled, liberal champion of empathy, tolerance and intelligence.

On the other was the poster most likely to use racist slurs. An anti Semite well before the latest Gaza conflict. Possibly the most intolerant to the thoughts of others poster we have. This is where all this Hopkins/Robinson stuff stems from. It's SOG's labelling of those who disagree. No one else had any interest in them. Decrying the lack of intelligence of others, leaning on a long career fighting knife crime, sexual assault and in journalism. Except he got caught out on the CPS own processes, showed a degree of victim disregard that would have got him transferred for his own personal safety and showed a willingness to believe or disbelieve legal outcomes as it suited. It turned out he had administrative rather than investigative duties. The crusading journalism? sales division, after clearly showing no journalistic investigative skills.

And no one would have cared less, or thought less of views for them being from that perspective. But the condescension and disregard for other equally valid views put plenty of people off well before me.  I leave you to discover the joys of Fantasy Mealtime, Nazi Belt Buckle Review and Distorted  On The Buses Bantz.

That political spectrum test showed us broadly where we were. SOGs the one who would fix his answers to the desired outcome, regardless of the actual opinions.

 

 

That’s all well and good, but do you fancy Katie Hopkins and do you think Ched Evans was a good player?

[Holmes_and_Watson]

4 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

That’s all well and good, but do you fancy Katie Hopkins and do you think Ched Evans was a good player?

I'd play Hopkins ahead of Downs and see how Evans worked out on a radio phone in show.

[sadoldgit]

14 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

ChatGPT is a series of algorithms and sequences of computer coding, it is not 'intelligence'. Like all such AI ChatBots it is prone to mistakes, misreadings, and sometimes the generation of total random bullshit.

Anybody who uses such facilities as a fount of wisdom is a fool..

 

Is it wrong? It takes information from elsewhere and it no different from other definitions elsewhere.

As for being a fool, I will let the guy who takes our philosophy class know that he is a fool as he uses ChatGPT to précis points of Plato’s Republic for us.

[sadoldgit]

For those who do not trust ChatGPT, here is a more in depth look at the “far right” ideologies.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d8b882740f0b6098d33fefa/Joe_Mulhall_-_Modernising_and_Mainstreaming_The_Contemporary_British_Far_Right.pdf

[badgerx16]

42 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Is it wrong? It takes information from elsewhere and it no different from other definitions elsewhere.

As for being a fool, I will let the guy who takes our philosophy class know that he is a fool as he uses ChatGPT to précis points of Plato’s Republic for us.

GOOGLE AI's response to "Can I trust ChatGPT";

"You can trust ChatGPT as a tool for brainstorming and getting general information, but not as a definitive source for critical facts, professional advice, or sensitive data. Its responses can contain "hallucinations" (false information), inaccuracies, and biases, and it can misinterpret data or generate flawed code. Therefore, always critically evaluate its outputs and verify information with reliable sources, especially for topics like legal, financial, or medical matters. "

 

Also, read this...

https://www.deficambridge.org/should-we-trust-chatgpt/

 

It is a tool; it can provide useful summaries and collations of information, but can also come up with incorrect assumptions, and even create totally fictitious sources. It should never be relied on in isolation, or as being definitively trustworthy.

As I said, if you use AI as a fount of wisdom, you are a fool.

 

Edit;

Even ChatGPT admits it is fallible; 

"That's a good question! Trust is important when using any technology. While I strive to provide accurate, helpful, and unbiased information, it's important to keep in mind that:

I’m not infallible – I rely on the data I was trained on, which means sometimes I might not have the most up-to-date info or might make mistakes."

Edited yesterday at 12:25 by badgerx16

[ecuk268]

37 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Is it wrong? It takes information from elsewhere and it no different from other definitions elsewhere.

As for being a fool, I will let the guy who takes our philosophy class know that he is a fool as he uses ChatGPT to précis points of Plato’s Republic for us.

ChatGPT can be wrong for a number of reasons.

It is based on a Large Language Model which is basically a trawl of the internet hoovering up text, images spreadsheets etc. It is then "trained" to make sense of this mass of data using a set of algorithms which apply probability theory to produce results.

The training is not a rigid process. It depends on the trainers who could unwittingly introduce some form of bias. Also, the data it collects includes information that is wrong. A human would realise that a statement "a dog has 6 legs" is nonsense but the algorithm will compare it with other statements about dogs and realise that it's rubbish. That is a very simple example and easy for the algorithm to check, more subtle errors may slip through.

The date of the last training excecise is also important. it could be working on data that is months or years out of date.

The thing to realise is that it has no understanding or critical thinking. It works purely on patterns of data.

[badgerx16]

What would Plato make of someone who uses a computer to summarise his works ?

[badgerx16]

47 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

For those who do not trust ChatGPT, here is a more in depth look at the “far right” ideologies.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5d8b882740f0b6098d33fefa/Joe_Mulhall_-_Modernising_and_Mainstreaming_The_Contemporary_British_Far_Right.pdf

Nobody denies the existence of the "far right". People take issue with how readily you apply the epiphet to those who disagree with you.

[sadoldgit]

5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Nobody denies the existence of the "far right". People take issue with how readily you apply the epiphet to those who disagree with you.

Which is why I am defending my position here now.

Another definition of what the far right is from The Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and the Right. It says that far right politics include “persons or groups who hold extremist, nationalistic, xenophobic, homophobic, racist, religious fundamentalist or other reactionary views.”

Is it unreasonable to conclude that  anyone who expresses the views above or jump in to defend the people (examples; Trump, Farage, Robinson, Hopkins) who are called out for espousing the views above, support/share these far right ideologies?

Would you jump in to attack a poster who posts against something you were also deeply opposed to? I wouldn’t. Why would you unless you shared the same opinions?

 

 

[badgerx16]

15 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

Which is why I am defending my position here now.

Another definition of what the far right is from The Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left and the Right. It says that far right politics include “persons or groups who hold extremist, nationalistic, xenophobic, homophobic, racist, religious fundamentalist or other reactionary views.”

None those wre exclusively "right-wing" characteristics. Communist Russia exhibited extremist natinalistic, xenophobic, homophobic, and racist policies.

Is it unreasonable to conclude that  anyone who expresses the views above or jump in to defend the people (examples; Trump, Farage, Robinson, Hopkins) who are called out for espousing the views above, support/share these far right ideologies?

Yes, for the reason given above. Also, some of the "defence" of those people is not from a position of supporting them, per se, but in the interest of eupporting free epeech. Hopkins is a truly horrible person, but you have no right to call for her to be silenced.

Would you jump in to attack a poster who posts against something you were also deeply opposed to? I wouldn’t. Why would you unless you shared the same opinions?

Because that s the price of free epeech in a democracy.

 

[hypochondriac]

The thing is no one other than Soggy has expressed any interest in the likes of Katie Hopkins at all. I saw that some people had posted previously that Tommy Robinson has something of a point on occasion but that t's mostly ruined by his thuggish attitude and his grifting for donations which I agree with to be honest. Farage can be called many things but he obviously isn't far right. If anything he's pretty scared of being associated with anything too extreme which is one of the reasons why he shied away from Rupert Lowe. Lumping all these individuals or anyone who doesn't vehemently disagree with every single word they've ever said into one box marked far right just highlights the low IQ of the person making the accusations and like someone else says makes it easier to dismiss anyone they disagree with. 

[rallyboy]

We also have people who have slid so far to the right that they now see anyone in the middle as loony lefties.

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, rallyboy said:

We also have people who have slid so far to the right that they now see anyone in the middle as loony lefties.

Which posters? It is true that there are some posters on here that are left to far left. Some are pretty reasonable and others have some loony views. A bit like the average population to be honest. 

[Weston Super Saint]

9 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

Farage is a cunt for trying to downplay this though - the word, and we all know what it is, hasn’t been acceptable at all in public use for far more than 20 years at least, more like 30, the same as other ‘colloquial’ words used for British Asian and Black people at that time. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpvd298wxvro

There were a lot of words in that article so I may have missed it, but I didn't see what "the" word was that she used.

Doesn't really help to judge for ourselves if we don't know what she said. 

[Gloucester Saint]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

There were a lot of words in that article so I may have missed it, but I didn't see what "the" word was that she used.

Doesn't really help to judge for ourselves if we don't know what she said. 

It’s here https://www.facebook.com/100063703086121/posts/nigel-farage-sparks-fury-over-chinky-slur-row-️nigelfarage-has-ignited-a-storm-o/1419439373522819/

I have less of an issue with her - she apologised without excuses, taken training and education, and served her punishment.

It is Farage. Under the Coalition one of the Tory MPs said something foul in a committee. Whip removed, training and education, full apology and reinstated. 

Farage - ‘She’s a victim, everyone was using it 20 years ago’. Only the racist and ignorant were by 2005 Nigel. If the cap fits..

[skintsaint]

2 hours ago, Gloucester Saint said:

It’s here https://www.facebook.com/100063703086121/posts/nigel-farage-sparks-fury-over-chinky-slur-row-️nigelfarage-has-ignited-a-storm-o/1419439373522819/

I have less of an issue with her - she apologised without excuses, taken training and education, and served her punishment.

It is Farage. Under the Coalition one of the Tory MPs said something foul in a committee. Whip removed, training and education, full apology and reinstated. 

Farage - ‘She’s a victim, everyone was using it 20 years ago’. Only the racist and ignorant were by 2005 Nigel. If the cap fits..

[Gloucester Saint]

Not again surely, wheels coming off the clown car in another of the councils they ‘lead’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crk726m7j73o

[Turkish]

19 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

The thing is no one other than Soggy has expressed any interest in the likes of Katie Hopkins at all. I saw that some people had posted previously that Tommy Robinson has something of a point on occasion but that t's mostly ruined by his thuggish attitude and his grifting for donations which I agree with to be honest. Farage can be called many things but he obviously isn't far right. If anything he's pretty scared of being associated with anything too extreme which is one of the reasons why he shied away from Rupert Lowe. Lumping all these individuals or anyone who doesn't vehemently disagree with every single word they've ever said into one box marked far right just highlights the low IQ of the person making the accusations and like someone else says makes it easier to dismiss anyone they disagree with. 

Correct. I think at most one or two people mentioned Tommy Robinson a while back but the only person who talks about Robinson, Hopkins, Trump and Farage is him. The obsession is quite unhinged really. It's day after day after day going on and on and on about them. Then this image he's created in his own head that this forum is full of far right wingers who support them is just plain weird. A very, very strange individual who definitely is trying to hard.

[sadoldgit]

21 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

What would Plato make of someone who uses a computer to summarise his works ?

If he was alive today, apart from being very, very old, would be using the technology.

As for Reform. Not a fag paper between them and the Tories nowadays.

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/nigel-farage-tells-donors-he-expects-reform-election-deal-with-tories-report-401006/#

[sadoldgit]

21 hours ago, ecuk268 said:

ChatGPT can be wrong for a number of reasons.

It is based on a Large Language Model which is basically a trawl of the internet hoovering up text, images spreadsheets etc. It is then "trained" to make sense of this mass of data using a set of algorithms which apply probability theory to produce results.

The training is not a rigid process. It depends on the trainers who could unwittingly introduce some form of bias. Also, the data it collects includes information that is wrong. A human would realise that a statement "a dog has 6 legs" is nonsense but the algorithm will compare it with other statements about dogs and realise that it's rubbish. That is a very simple example and easy for the algorithm to check, more subtle errors may slip through.

The date of the last training excecise is also important. it could be working on data that is months or years out of date.

The thing to realise is that it has no understanding or critical thinking. It works purely on patterns of data.

I don’t doubt that it can be wrong, but was it’s definition of “far right” wrong?

[badgerx16]

5 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I don’t doubt that it can be wrong, but was it’s definition of “far right” wrong?

Whether that definition is correct or not, your application of the term to describe posters is flawed and misguided.

Edited 2 hours ago by badgerx16

[sadoldgit]

11 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Whether that definition is correct or not, your application of the term to describe posters is flawed and misguided.

In your opinion. For example there are plenty of clear examples of Islamophobia on this forum. There are clear examples of support for people with far right views on this forum.

[badgerx16]

10 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

In your opinion. For example there are plenty of clear examples of Islamophobia on this forum. There are clear examples of support for people with far right views on this forum.

To turn your words back on you - in your opinion. Personally I think that you are wrong in several of your charaterisations, snd I feel that a few posters "play" you.

The "Right" in politics is a broad spectrum, as is the "Left", and people may feel one particular issue/ opinion is important to them without espousing the full mindset of the more extreme wings. For instance, I know people who show Islamophobic tendencies yet vote Labour. There is plenty of evidence for Labour voters switching to Reform - are they suddenly "far right" ? Perhaps the spread of opinions on the forum is actually representative of the general population.

Edited 2 hours ago by badgerx16

[Turkish]

38 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

In your opinion. For example there are plenty of clear examples of Islamophobia on this forum. There are clear examples of support for people with far right views on this forum.

Post the links to them then 

[whelk]

Remember if you criticise the medieval elements of Islam or the suicidal Allahu Akbar attackers then you clearly need an Islamophobic label

[Sir Ralph]

56 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

In your opinion. For example there are plenty of clear examples of Islamophobia on this forum. There are clear examples of support for people with far right views on this forum.

This also comes down to what you classify as an unacceptable comment. My tolerance for challenging all groups of people in relation to cultural or societal issues are quite wide. It’s called freedom of speech. Regardless of the group it would need to be based on real hatred or a lack of evidence for me to consider that someone’s comment is genuinely offensive. If people provide evidence or their opinion is based on life experience I don’t believe that should be considered offensive but they have the right to be heard.
 

What you actually do by taking that approach is pushing people into a situation where they don’t feel listened to. I think that people that have this mindset have actually contributed to the resurgence of groups to the right of centre, as a protest against not being able to have an opinion without being called x y and z.

Edited 1 hour ago by Sir Ralph

[AlexLaw76]

Anyone to the right of Joseph Stalin is on the far-right, accordinging to our own Jew hating poster....

[badgerx16]

10 minutes ago, whelk said:

Remember if you criticise the medieval elements of Islam or the suicidal Allahu Akbar attackers then you clearly need an Islamophobic label

Given the animosity often exhibited between Shia and Sunni, are Muslims themselves Islamophobic ?

[sadoldgit]

31 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

This also comes down to what you classify as an unacceptable comment. My tolerance for challenging all groups of people in relation to cultural or societal issues are quite wide. It’s called freedom of speech. Regardless of the group it would need to be based on real hatred or a lack of evidence for me to consider that someone’s comment is genuinely offensive. If people provide evidence or their opinion is based on life experience I don’t believe that should be considered offensive but they have the right to be heard.
 

What you actually do by taking that approach is pushing people into a situation where they don’t feel listened to. I think that people that have this mindset have actually contributed to the resurgence of groups to the right of centre, as a protest against not being able to have an opinion without being called x y and z.

I have been on this forum for 19 years. My posting style has been developed over the years by being constantly attacked by people who have an issue with me attacking people like Trump, Farage, Robinson, Hopkins etc. and their opinions. I don’t see you defending my right of free speech. Is that because you sympathise with the things that I don’t agree with?

I disagree with your opinion about the resurgence  of the right. I think people now feel emboldened to say what they think because the see people in the public eye getting away with it. It never went away. It just went underground. People call people like Trump and Farage racist because they are,  not because they are misunderstood. People are getting upset because they are being called out for what they are and don’t like hearing the truth.

Edited 53 minutes ago by sadoldgit
Added text

[sadoldgit]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

To turn your words back on you - in your opinion. Personally I think that you are wrong in several of your charaterisations, snd I feel that a few posters "play" you.

The "Right" in politics is a broad spectrum, as is the "Left", and people may feel one particular issue/ opinion is important to them without espousing the full mindset of the more extreme wings. For instance, I know people who show Islamophobic tendencies yet vote Labour. There is plenty of evidence for Labour voters switching to Reform - are they suddenly "far right" ? Perhaps the spread of opinions on the forum is actually representative of the general population.

I quite agree that there is a broad spectrum on both the Left and on the right. I don’t think that the people I have mentioned and who have been supported by some on here (Trump, Farage, Robinson etc) are remotely centre right or just medium right. They are all what any politically commentator would call “far right.”

[Turkish]

12 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I quite agree that there is a broad spectrum on both the Left and on the right. I don’t think that the people I have mentioned and who have been supported by some on here (Trump, Farage, Robinson etc) are remotely centre right or just medium right. They are all what any politically commentator would call “far right.”

Who supports them and provide links to your claims. Who are these far right? It shouldn’t be fucking hard you go on about it enough 

Edited 36 minutes ago by Turkish

[badgerx16]

19 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I quite agree that there is a broad spectrum on both the Left and on the right. I don’t think that the people I have mentioned and who have been supported by some on here (Trump, Farage, Robinson etc) are remotely centre right or just medium right. They are all what any politically commentator would call “far right.”

Trump is more of a low IQ, narcissistic Plutocrat than anything else, though he does seem to suffer with hero-worship for Xi, Putin, etc. The thing to worry about with him is who is behind the scenes pulling his strings. 

Farage is similarly at heart a Plutocrat, obsessed with his populist image and riding public opinion, but much better suited to vociferous opposition than being required to actually make the important decisions. I think his politics are more self-centred theatre than practical option.

Yaxley-Lennon is a rabble rousing thug. I am not sure there are more than a handful on here who support him in any way, shape, or form.

Edited 29 minutes ago by badgerx16

[whelk]

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

The thing to worry about with him is who is behind the scenes pulling his strings. 

Stephen Miller would happily be a commander of a concentration camp. With his missus egging him on to get the kill count up

[badgerx16]

Just now, whelk said:

Stephen Miller would happily be a commander of a concentration camp. With his missus egging him on to get the kill count up

Pete Hegseth has reportedly told Mrs Miller that he hates her husband, and wouldn't trust him to babysit.

[sadoldgit]

3 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Trump is more of a low IQ, narcissistic Plutocrat than anything else, though he does seem to suffer with hero-worship for Xi, Putin, etc. The thing to worry about with him is who is behind the scenes pulling his strings. 

Farage is similarly at heart a Plutocrat, obsessed with his populist image and riding public opinion, but much better suited to vociferous opposition than being required to actually make the important decisions. I think his politics are more self-centred theatre than practical option.

Yaxley-Lennon is a rabble rousing thug. I am not sure there are more than a handful on here who support him in any way, shape, or form.

What ever they are Badger, they are playing to and resonate with people with far right sensibilities.

Not more than a handful? So you agree with me that he does have some sympathisers here then?

This one is for you Ralph. I don’t think you answered my question. You said that you thought that I had some extremist views. What are they please?

[badgerx16]

2 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

What ever they are Badger, they are playing to and resonate with people with far right sensibilities.

Not more than a handful? So you agree with me that he does have some sympathisers here then?

 

How many hundred members are there on here ? It would be a miracle if there weren't any.

[tdmickey3]

[AlexLaw76]

55 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

I have been on this forum for 19 years. My posting style has been developed over the years by being constantly attacked by people who have an issue with me attacking people like Trump, Farage, Robinson, Hopkins etc. and their opinions. I don’t see you defending my right of free speech. Is that because you sympathise with the things that I don’t agree with?

I

I first instance I can recall of you being attacked was when you were very forward in your views regarding those who may have questioned the Ched Evans initial judgement (whilst having nothing of the sort to say about your hero, Geoffrey Boycott). 

All people did at the time, was conduct a little bit of research in the Ched Evans case and believed there was more to it. You were having none of it, calling people rape apologists, misogynists, and all sorts of other disgusting stuff. You claimed that you were important in the CPS and this was a closed case.

Did not turn out that way did it. 

Ever since then, anyone who may hold a right of centre view is some sort of mad racist, according to you