What’s new? Talk about current news here.
Home » Forums » The Loveland Arms – pub chat » News thread
And now…
Only until they walk on stage, grab Trump / Vance by the nuts, then squeeze and twist until they’re bawling on camera, cue the mob turning on them.
If only that would happen.
Interesting:
https://abcnews.com/Politics/kamala-harris-shes-thinking-running-president/story?id=131922974
She had her chance. She needs to sit 2028 out.
It was literally an emergency because of Biden at that debate. She was so much a “last minute” option.
But who can the Dems “develop” now as a viable candidate?
Interesting:
https://abcnews.com/Politics/kamala-harris-shes-thinking-running-president/story?id=131922974
She had her chance. She needs to sit 2028 out.
It was literally an emergency because of Biden at that debate. She was so much a “last minute” option.
But who can the Dems “develop” now as a viable candidate?
Sadly, Gavin Newsom is probably the most viable candidate at this point. And frankly, that just sickens me.
I kinda like Ossoff, but I don’t know very much about him.
But who can the Dems “develop” now as a viable candidate?
Mark Kelly, Senator from Arizona, former astronaut who is married to a victim of gun violence, who reminded members of the military that they can refuse to follow illegal orders from their Commander-in-Chief, and currently has a lawsuit against Pete Hegseth for trying to strip him of his military rank and benefits. I think he can appeal to both conservatives and liberals (and maybe some non-MAGA Republicans as well).
Yeah, Kelly could be a good choice.
Senator Kelly sounds like a good choice (Provided he doesn’t restart building Sentinels 🤣)
Still… it comes down to US voter mentality, mindset. I’ve read and posted the gist of books and essays on the subject and this pic mentions education:

But who can the Dems “develop” now as a viable candidate?
Mark Kelly, Senator from Arizona, former astronaut who is married to a victim of gun violence, who reminded members of the military that they can refuse to follow illegal orders from their Commander-in-Chief, and currently has a lawsuit against Pete Hegseth for trying to strip him of his military rank and benefits. I think he can appeal to both conservatives and liberals (and maybe some non-MAGA Republicans as well).
- This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by
njerry.
I would definitely vote for him.
Oh yeah, I saw him on the Daily Show, he seemed pretty cool.
Even by 2026 standards, this is goddamn nasty.
The CNN account of the online how to commit rape and monetise with video broke, involving thousands of men using their girlfriend, partner or wife as a commodity, and bragging about it online.
It is every bit as goddamn awful as you may wish to imagine and then some.
Argos is a radio show/ podcast in the Netherlands
Wow, that’s weird they branched out to that from the shops they have over here.
Hegseth … unbelievable
There is a bit of a backlash against metoo stuff here in the Netherlands. A Dutch singer, Marco Borsato, who was on trial for sexual assault of a minor and who was acquitted was on tv again for the first time in years, trying to do a come back. Some people firmly believe he did nothing wrng, this despite certain clear established facts, like he apped an underage girl about masturbation. In the trial it sort of didn’t get proven definitively that he did things which can be described as sexual assault, but it’s clear he’s a pervert who was hanging around girls of the “Epstein age”, like 13-14-15, way too much. And yet many people say “oh, that’s not so bad. He should be welcomed back to resume his career”. Makes me sick.
Hegseth … unbelievable
It’s so fucking hard to take these people seriously, because they are such fucking idiots. But so were the nazis, of course (with a few exceptions).
A remembrance here. The kids would have all been in their mid 40s now:

Some reports have him as the founder of “Latinos for Trump”:
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/pro-trump-journalist-deported-immigration-crackdowns-1792165
Noooooo don’t have fun
Interesting how “being a burden on the NHS” is used to take away rights.
Neo-puritan shitstains.
This is probably my fault; just the other day I saw a cigarette display in some shop and said to my UK cousin “I’m surprised people still smoke, knowing what we know about the health risks.” Maybe my cousin has a connection with the NHS.
Our billionaire* background-in-financial-trading chancellor has just told us that we shouldn’t expect to be able to live off pensions when we’re retired but that those will at most be a small part of what we will need. He didn’t mention where people should get the rest of the money for their old age from. I truly think he just doesn’t understand why everybody doesn’t do what he does, just buy stocks for a few thousand Euros a month for yourself and for your kids to make sure your future is secure.
*Okay, so is only a millionaire.
I think it’s an endless road if you start forbidding stuff like that…it starts with certain drugs, and you can say, OK we’ll forbid recreative use of fentanyl and crazy stuff like nitazenes because that seldom ends well…but then you get into things liek cocaine and psychedelics and I think really it should be legal to use that. Never mind cannabis. But now they seem to be going further with tobacco. And undoubtedly you will see people calling for stricter measures on alcohol, maybe some even want to outlaw alcohol. And higher taxes on fat and sugar, maybe mandatory courses to lose weight because obesity burdens the NHS. Maybe we should outlaw obesity. It’s a slippery slope.
A soldier who made 400K on Maduro’s capture:
https://abcnews.com/US/doj-arrests-soldier-made-400000-betting-maduros-removal/story?id=132325426
——
Now social media is going off on video of this Hispanic female Houston police officer and her rant. She used to be in the Marines too.
A soldier who made 400K on Maduro’s capture:
I guess profiting from insider information is okay only if you’re a member of Congress or a member of Trump’s family.
US military strategy assumption:
Our enemy will only engage us in battle when they are technologically adept enough to do so, but where we retain technological advantage.
Cue an Iranian F5 bombing the crap out of a US base in Kuwait, using old bombs Patriots do not seem to recognise.
People are aware weaponry doesn’t become inert over time, right? Every so often in the UK and Europe unexploded WW2 bombs get found.
Freedom to smoke versus freedom from smoking.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/apr/29/uk-gradual-smoking-ban-success
Teenage boys who raped underage girls were not given a jail sentence:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c332ljdkd81o
The judge did not want to “criminalize them”.
It’s a lot worse than that. They clearly planned how to isolate her, then raped her and filmed it. Twice. There might be an argument for charging the parents of the boys too.
I suspect one of the details that’ll come out is the sentencing guidelines were too imbalanced.
It is likely the sentence is revised by the Attorney General, as it’s already been referred and there’s no way the original one stands.
This is probably my fault; just the other day I saw a cigarette display in some shop and said to my UK cousin “I’m surprised people still smoke, knowing what we know about the health risks.” Maybe my cousin has a connection with the NHS.
![]()
Honestly, anyone under the age of about 45 who smokes is an unmitigated idiot. It has been common knowledge for that long that cigarettes are incredibly harmful to health. To choose to take up smoking at any point since the late 90s ish is just a moronic decision and your resultant health issues shouldn’t be the state’s burden.
Honestly, anyone
under the age of about 45who smokes is an unmitigated idiot.
I’m in my early fifties and I’m an idiot. Well… not as much of one as I used to be, but I do still have a cigarette now and then.
Anyways, I definitely knew that smoking was unhealthy and so did people who were in their teens in the eighties and seventies. So the cutoff point would be somewhere between 70 and 80 I guess, but if you’re 80 and haven’t managed to stop for the sixty years that it was proven to cause cancer and other sever illnesses, that still makes you an idiot.
Obesity kills almost as many people as smoking. Are we going to ban cookies next?
We’re going to introduce a sugar tax over here, and I think that actually makes a lot of sense.
But it’s a fair point. There’s a lot of unhealthy behaviour that you could make illegal with the same logic, from extreme sports to fuck all sports to alcohol to sugar and god knows what else. I think it’s fair to tax unhealthy products so you contribute more, given that you also potentially cause health costs, but that’s as far as this should go IMO.
Obesity kills almost as many people as smoking. Are we going to ban cookies next?
Your burgers and milshakes are burdening the NHS!
I huge issue is that a lot of foods, especially junk ones, are designed to not provide a feeling of being satiated. Therefore, you eat more than you really should and continue to buy more.
Throw in the fact that in the US, there are “food deserts”, where there are no nearby well-stocked grocery stores but there are an abundance of fast food places. This occurs in poorer areas, which are mostly minorities. They can’t help but to eat poorly, and then suffer from resulting health issues.
But food, even junk food, has a positive benefit of being, you know, food. It’s misuse (and in some cases not even that) which causes obesity. You could even argue alcohol has the same limited positive health benefits when taken in moderation. Cigarettes don’t. It’s an artificial product we created entirely for a recreational activity that causes damaging health effects.
It’s hard to convey to those in the US how bonkers the concept of food deserts looks to those outside it.
Ironically, in the 1930s tobacco companies used to advertise the health benefits of smoking cigarettes. In the 1950s, after scientific studies began noting the damage that smoking did to our bodies (not just our lungs), those companies doubled down, getting endorsements from “doctors” stating that their brand is healthier than its competitors (“four out of five doctors choose our brand”).
Ironically, in the 1930s tobacco companies used to advertise the health benefits of smoking cigarettes. In the 1950s, after scientific studies began noting the damage that smoking did to our bodies (not just our lungs), those companies doubled down, getting endorsements from “doctors” stating that their brand is healthier than its competitors (“four out of five doctors choose our brand”).
In spite of knowing, from their own research, that their product was actually incredibly harmful.
The way this went tells you everything you need to know about corporations.
This discussion makes me want to take up smoking again but I’m too poor.
Weird that it’s what seen as the most liberal country in the work, the UK, who is the first country ever to ban cigarettes.
Weird that it’s what seen as the most liberal country in the work, the UK, who is the first country ever to ban cigarettes.
Actually, the UK is not the first: Maldives first country to impose generational smoking ban</a>
Weird that it’s what seen as the most liberal country in the work, the UK, who is the first country ever to ban cigarettes.
Actually, the UK is not the first: Maldives first country to impose generational smoking ban</a>
Alright, thanks for correcting me.
Anyway I’ll shut up about this now. I’ll be in the food and drink thread
https://www.thejournal.ie/captain-americas-grafton-street-closing-7054098-May2026/
Millar and Hitch were flabbergasted at the existence of Captain America’s when they first came to Dublin to promote Ultimates 2 – especially as they were using art from Ultimates to promote the place at the time.
This discussion makes me want to take up smoking again but I’m too poor.
Vaping’s cheaper…