Politics and in-fighting. Which I guess is just politics. Or infighting

Topic

I’m not sure any of the democratic candidates really would want the job after the effects of the pandemic. The DNC can select anyone it likes, right? Maybe Elizabeth Warren will end up the surprise pick.

Replies

Christian wrote:

That was something someone actually thought?!

Presumably the same way people still think the crisis de jour will make Donald Trump grow into the role of President.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Todd, Christian, Dave

Christian wrote:

That was something someone actually thought?!

I saw the head of ITV news ponder it. ‘Becoming a father changes your perspective’. I’d agree with that in general but it’s his seventh fucking kid (probably). His eldest is 27, so he’s had a hell of a long time for parenthood to change his worldview.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Todd, lorcan_nagle, Dave

Yeah, I think this is more of a scorpion-and-frog thing we’re talking here.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Todd, lorcan_nagle

<p style=”text-align: left;”>I wonder when we’ll get the Johnson/Trump crossover episode.</p>

Christian wrote:

That was something someone actually thought?!

Well, I had not so much the ‘new kid’ angle in mind, for the reasons Gar’s covered, but more the whole, you know, brush with DEATH angle.

The kind of thing that tends to prompt some self-reflection in most people, perhaps some lifestyle changes….  Wait, who am I talking about again?

Oh yeah.  Nope, not happening.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Ben wrote:

Christian wrote:

That was something someone actually thought?!

Well, I had not so much the ‘new kid’ angle in mind, for the reasons Gar’s covered, but more the whole, you know, brush with DEATH angle.

The kind of thing that tends to prompt some self-reflection in most people, perhaps some lifestyle changes….  Wait, who am I talking about again?

Oh yeah.  Nope, not happening.

Boris after self reflection:

“Time to find a NEW woman to impregnate!”

2 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, garjones

 

 

 

5 users thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith, Todd, DavidM, Dave, Ben

2 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Dave

[DavidM]

• This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by DavidM.
• This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by DavidM.
• This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by DavidM.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Christian, Todd, lorcan_nagle, Dave, njerry

Wouldn’t it be nice if the Commons was always like this?

Keir Starmer QC has 60-page Govt document, hops from page to page, loving detail, citing numbers & firing questions.

Johnson has no idea what’s in the document, hates detail & has no jeering, booing Tories to back him.

This is Boris Johnson’s nightmare.pic.twitter.com/BnXrl0dgX4

— Mike Galsworthy (@mikegalsworthy) May 11, 2020

4 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Christian, Todd, Dave

I think lots of people had forgotten Starmer’s background.

Ben wrote:

I think lots of people had forgotten Starmer’s background.

It’s a bit hard when literally every vaguely centrist political commentator repeatedly refers to him as “forensic” at every opportunity.

Is he a CSI?

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

Not quite but he is the former Director of Public Prosecutions. He got his ‘sir’ for doing all the top lawyering and ‘ting.

Pffffft doesnt seem so impressive

Starmer is doing what Johnson has rarely experienced – having someone be very attentive to his statements and the info his government issues.

This really isn’t supposed to happen.

The other point I’ve seen is Johnson isn’t as at ease without his pack mob of MPs backing him up.

It is interesting because he is really the anti-Johnson. Johnson is a guy that wings it and basically powers on past everything based on emotional arguments. Starmer has an eye for detail and facts, he had one hour to go over a document that Johnson was overseeing and tripped him up all the way through.

He’ll destroy him in Prime Minister’s questions from here to eternity but it’s a question of how much of the public will be swayed by that and still go with Johnson’s ‘Go For It, We Are A Great Nation’ rhetoric. The clip doesn’t have his answers but they were just general waffle about nothing in particular with nothing addressed.

I also sense Starmer’s strategically holding back because of the current crisis, it’s dangerous to be seen as trying to create political capital from the deaths of so many people. Once the worst of it is over I think the training gloves will come off and it could tell on BJ if he’s being verbally battered week after week.

2 users thanked author for this post.

DavidM, Dave

Boo, Australia, and you were doing so well:

Australia’s government has introduced a bill to parliament that would greatly expand the powers of security and intelligence agencies.

Elements include:

* Detaining minors as young as 14 for questioning
* Allowing wider surveillance
* Granting the use of tracking devices through “internal authorisation” rather than a warrant
* Making it easier to get a warrant

Opposition politicians and rights activists have already raised concerns over the timing of the bill’s introduction – suggesting the government is trying to pass it amid the distraction of the coronavirus pandemic.

“To use the pandemic as cover for the increased scope of the surveillance state is dangerous and cynical,” said Greens senator Nick McKim.

This was introduced by Peter Dutton who is admittedly a giant fucking jerkhead but they’ve been under debate since 2018 and haven’t gone through.   Not dissimilar to lots of changes of this sort, they often make scandalous headlines,  but rarely make law with the type of teeth that made the headlines interesting.

As it stands, the legislation extends to allow 14 year olds to be questioned in the presence of lawyer and a guardian by an ASIO official in connection with offences under that jurisdiction (ASIO is our MI6 so this means terrorist activity but arises in connection with the firearms obtained by a 15 year old).  Previously a judge needed to make an order to do this but the new laws would do away with that requirement.

 

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, DavidM

I hope Biden is going for Warren as VP, she seems the best choice if he wants a woman (or if he’s pushed). It’s going to be weird with the allegations against him.

 

I think, if he were to win, he won’t complete the first term. He really seems to be struggling with his mental capacities. So Warren seems at least a competent replacement, if he steps down.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Christian

2 users thanked author for this post.

garjones, Todd

Yeah, those clips of reporters asking Trump what Obama would actually be accused of, if he should be sent to jail like he says, what the actual crime he committed is supposed to be, and he just waffles on about “you know what it is” and “Obamagate” and he clearly doesn’t have any idea whatsoever about what it’s supposed to be, this greatest crime in US politics ever…

We never had words for Trump. We never will. Will you people just finally put a stop to this? Pretty please?

3 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Ben, Martin Smith

Not only will the US not put an end to Trump, but the Republicans will continue to support him and the Democrats will continue to waffle and someone worse than him will be elected as president within 20 years.  Because to actually put an end to Trump they’d have to cast a critical eye across the entire political system and make sweeping revisions – but neither party wants that.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Ben

I don’t know, man. I mean, yeah, that’d kind of have to happen to make long-lasting changes for the better, but surely you can just fucking vote out the fucking flim-flam man? I still believe that would happen if the Democrats put up a somewhat competent candidate who is likeable and who people could get behind, like they did with Obama (who was immensely competent, okay, but I think moderately so would be enough to defeat Trump). Instead, of, you know, a guy known for beeing creepy with women who is also falling apart from dementia.

When it comes to the other thing, to somebody who actually tries to change things for the better… I say give it eight years until the Ocasio-Cortez campaign. (Sixteen years if Trump gets another term.)

Christian wrote:

I don’t know, man. I mean, yeah, that’d kind of have to happen to make long-lasting changes for the better, but surely you can just fucking vote out the fucking flim-flam man? I still believe that would happen if the Democrats put up a somewhat competent candidate who is likeable and who people could get behind, like they did with Obama (who was immensely competent, okay, but I think moderately so would be enough to defeat Trump). Instead, of, you know, a guy known for beeing creepy with women who is also falling apart from dementia.

I’d put even odds on the ideologue even worse than Trump being a Democrat. And running someone likeable like Obama isn’t particularly useful when Obama is still really, really shit. Obama still put people in Guantanamo despite promising he’d close it, he approved more extrajudicial killings of Middle Eastern people than Bush, he opened the ICE camps that made the news under Trump and he deported more people on a per-day average than Bush or Trump.  He did nothing to fight the erosion of reproductive rights on a state level.  He put a bandage on the healthcare crisis, but people still go bankrupt from healthcare costs.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Christian wrote:

When it comes to the other thing, to somebody who actually tries to change things for the better… I say give it eight years until the Ocasio-Cortez campaign. (Sixteen years if Trump gets another term.)

I largely hope the Democrats don’t manage to carve out AOC’s soul before she’s old enough to run for President.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

Obama was pretty awful all things considered. He also went to war in Libya, destabilized Syria, meddled in Ukraine, didn’t change the draconic surveillance state put in place by his predecessor or re-introduce habeas corpus, and he prosecuted more whistleblowers than anyone did before him.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

I mean, obviously the Democrats aren’t as bad as the Republicans, but their mantra is “keep things as they are”, which means that generally they either hold the line at whatever damage the Republicans have done in their last time in the White House, or to revert it to the damage level that was prevalent the last time they were in the White House.  Biden’s message has been “nothing will fundamentally change”.  Great.  Tell that to the thousands of people losing their homes while there are more empty houses than homeless people in America.  Tell it to the medical bankruptcies, the workers losing their jobs to outsourcing and automation, the people relying on public infrastructure that isn’t being maintained or in the case of schools, actively dismantled, the women in need of healthcare, persecuted ethnic minorities and LGBT people.

And they wonder why more people describe the Democrats as a conservative party.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Will_C

You could also tell it to all the innocent people getting unlawfully killed by police, but they’re dead so they won’t hear you.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, lorcan_nagle

Obama-Biden is less awful than McCain-Palin, but that does not automatically render them good.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C, lorcan_nagle

lorcan_nagle wrote:

I’d put even odds on the ideologue even worse than Trump being a Democrat. And running someone likeable like Obama isn’t particularly useful when Obama is still really, really shit. Obama still put people in Guantanamo despite promising he’d close it, he approved more extrajudicial killings of Middle Eastern people than Bush, he opened the ICE camps that made the news under Trump and he deported more people on a per-day average than Bush or Trump.  He did nothing to fight the erosion of reproductive rights on a state level.  He put a bandage on the healthcare crisis, but people still go bankrupt from healthcare costs.

You can find a lot of things that Obama did wrong, but you’re skipping the things he did right. With healthcare, the bandage was all he could get done, and it was better than nothing. He also allowed the Bush tax cuts to expire, he created the Consumer Protection Agency, changed the US’ approach to climate change (having them lead the world effort for a while there), pushing for expanding alternative energies and expanding DOE regulations, he supported same-sex marriage and overhauled the students loan system. He also pushed for (and didn’t get) universal pre-K, a better minimum wage, and paid parental leave.

We could go on about this; the point is that it is facetious to leave out the good Obama did, and the good he tried to do but didn’t manage to get done. Equating him with Trump is cynical and doesn’t help anyone; in fact, just dismissing all mainstream politics as the same is what allows people like Trump to win and keep stomping his boot in the faces of the majority of Americans.

Christian wrote:

You can find a lot of things that Obama did wrong, but you’re skipping the things he did right. With healthcare, the bandage was all he could get done,

Except it wasn’t, he had a supermajority in both Congress and the Senate at the time and spent months negotiating with Republicans and watering down his plans when he had no need to except to appear concilatory.

Christian wrote:

changed the US’ approach to climate change (having them lead the world effort for a while there), pushing for expanding alternative energies and expanding DOE regulations,

and how long did that last?

Christian wrote:

he supported same-sex marriage

Reluctantly.

Christian wrote:

We could go on about this; the point is that it is facetious to leave out the good Obama did, and the good he tried to do but didn’t manage to get done.

The problem is that in the end, Obama’s good was scribbling in the margins, and his bad killed thousands.  He was elected on a platform of hope and change, and didn’t deliver.

Equating him with Trump is cynical and doesn’t help anyone; in fact, just dismissing all mainstream politics as the same is what allows people like Trump to win and keep stomping his boot in the faces of the majority of Americans.

I didn’t equate him with Trump, and I disagree that even if someone did that’s what allows people like Trump to win.  What allowed Trump to win is the partisan nature of US politics, that the Democrats spent decades trying to appear conciliatory and reasonable with the stated goal of gaining two Republican voters in a swing state for every Democrat they lose in a safe one – and continuing that policy decades after it’s been proven false. What got Trump is a Republican party that doesn’t care about morality or ideology except for lining their own pockets, and a voter base that is fine with being robbed so long as someone else, preferably black is being robbed more. What got Trump is the dismantling of the education system, multiple rewriting of lines in the sand to provide one part or the other a minor electoral advantage instead of accurately representing democracy, and the active disenfranchisement of voters who might buck the status quo.

What got Trump is a culture that’s been indoctrinated and propagandised to the point that they believe they’re the greatest country in the world, and that they can’t do any better – despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.  What got Trump is people being told to vote for the lesser of two evils over and over, and the end result still being evil. What got Trump is young people being promised a better future, then seeing them ignored for 8 years, and then being told that if they didn’t vote for Clinton or Biden, they were giving the world Trump.

And that is bullshit.  The Democrats have nobody to blame for their incompetence but themselves.  If they didn’t want Trump then they should have run good candidates against him. And maybe, just maybe they shouldn’t have betrayed the people who would have voted for them in order to prevent a lesser evil over and over.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Will_C

The strange thing on that majority Obama had at the start is it wasn’t we tend to think of a majority being, in that it wasn’t a loyal one. On that healthcare bill there was democrat opposition to democrat presidential policy in a way that isn’t replicated by the republicans.

Voter apathy isn’t good but there’s some reason for it in the US.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

I dont think your opinions going to change here Lorcan and I know you don’t reply  to me in this thread bit it appears to be based on a narrative as much as anyone else’s can be.

The American political system is bipartisan and that necessitates cooperation. It does not behoove the constitution to run it like a tyrant and whether or not you believe Obama could have done more with his health care policies, he needed lots of the republican donors (and, I suppose Governors) onside to implement minor regulatory legislation relating transmissible insurance and tax credits in order for it to work. It was not omnibus legislation and did not pass as such.

I dont think anyone else here works in any policy making capacity (aside from me)? If you do put your hand up because it like to know if you think it’s possible to pass legislation which is both transformative and at a federal level withour making concessions to the opposition, even if you had 80% of seats in both House and Senate.

On the committees im on, we vote and pass policy in connection with the profession and it’s hotly debated. No one person, one political alignment, persuasuon, corporate representative, urban or regional practitioner gets to make a decision over the smallest change without it being rigorously vetted by the others (even the chairwoman). And we’re only groups of 20 people and in what is ostensibly the same party.

What I’m saying is you get done what you can and you try for me but there are always people biting around the edges. That’s why Presidential candidates campaign on the legislation they’ve been instrumental to pass, because the delegates know how hard this is.  The ACA was not different irrespective of the numbers in the house and Senate.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian

It’s not just you Tim.

Away from the public politics, most politicians know they have be more pragmatic but I think there has been a big shift away from this towards ideology – which is a problem.

1 user thanked author for this post.

I was willing to give you a chance to actually respect my wishes and boundaries Tim, but fuck it.  Welcome to the ignore list.

Perhaps the discourse between center-left and progressive-left is that one favours pragmatism and one favours ideology, and the center-left says the progressive-left is too naive as to how the system works and the progressive-left says the center-left have sacrified their ideals for the company line. But…

 

Actually, no but, that is just probably what the discourse is.  I don’t identify with either and think each policy should be taken on it’s own merits, but it’s basically impossible to do that on a federal political level, because, you’re not just looking at the public sector and economic responses to you politcies, but youre also looking at behavioural and the media narrative.  Basically, I don’t agree with the narrative that Obama is somehow soft because he didn’t pass some idealistic version of the ACA.  I think the ACA he managed to get through was pretty damn good and probably all that realistically could have been achieved no matter whom was in power (even if it was Bernie!) but sadly it should have been a first step buttressed by another 4 to 8 years of a democratic cabinet, which, sadly, did not happen.

Now, democrats are faced with the very unlikely prospect of ever getting 4 terms back to back. At least for another 20 years.  The approach to policy making has changed as Congress has and America has.  I don’t think we’ll ever see any long-term policy pass here-on-in unless it’s under emergency circumstances (for example Climate Change, when certain idiot republican donors recognise large swathes of beach front real estate development is subject to projected climate change and loses any economic value) and even then that’s more like a 2050-era congress when we’re all already fucked.

lorcan_nagle wrote:

I was willing to give you a chance to actually respect my wishes and boundaries Tim, but fuck it.  Welcome to the ignore list.

You could have chosen not to reply?

2 users thanked author for this post.

I was going to ask if we could all just get along but then realized this is the Politics Thread.

2 users thanked author for this post.

JRCarter, lorcan_nagle

I’m not really sure what was so inflammatory about my posts but I’m certainly not going to deny anyone’s right to blank me if they don’t like them.

I guess it frees me up to broadcast unilaterally about my true passion: taxation law.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian

Oh no.

I mean, do tell. Sounds fascinating.

Gentlemen, you can’t fight here! This is the war room!

6 users thanked author for this post.

SteveUK, Dave, Christian, lorcan_nagle, Todd

There is a very satisfying shitstorm now centred on Dominic Cummings.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Dave

Dave wrote:

So it seems Dominic Cummings travelled from London to Durham to visit his elderly parents while he and his wife were both suffering from coronavirus symptoms.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52779356

I’m sure he’ll quickly do the right thing and resign and we won’t get a load of Tory spin and obfuscation in an attempt to lead everyone away from the story, right?

Ben wrote:

There is a very satisfying shitstorm now centred on Dominic Cummings.

Yeah, can’t deny this is an extremely satisfying way for him to go down.

And the Tories’ attempts to spin this are looking increasingly desperate. He’s pretty clearly got to go at this point, and they’re risking more and more damage the longer he hangs on by his fingernails.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, lorcan_nagle

It’s almost a bit of a disappointment if this is what cuts Cummings down, and not the consequences of the disasters he’s directly responsible for. But hey, as long as he’s fucking gone, I’ll take it.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, Ben

Wrong, Dave, wrong. Cummings is a man of integrity you know.

Yep, Johnson and his government has just jumped the shark.

He thought he had a hard time over the NHS surcharge? That’ll be nothing compared to this. His backing of Cummings is petrol on the flames.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Dave

I feel as though an aspect of this that isn’t really being talked about is Cummings knowing where the bodies are buried for a lot of these Tory MPs. So if he’s under pressure he can threaten to bring a world of shit down on them on the way out. (Gove I think has gone on record about Cummings having helped him out of a tight spot in the past.)

I’m just glad this kind of destabilisation isn’t all happening in the middle of a years-long Tory political disaster slow-motion car-crash with a looming hard deadline, while also coinciding with a worldwide healthcare crisis. I mean, can you imagine the shit we’d be in then?

5 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, Todd, Martin Smith, Ben, lorcan_nagle

This (now deleted) tweet is apparently real.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, lorcan_nagle

Dave wrote:

This (now deleted) tweet is apparently real.

Something (browser or adblocker or some shit) is blocking me from seeing that.

Can someone transcribe?

Arrogant and offensive. Can you imagine having to work with these truth twisters? Allegedly ó the UK Civil Service

1 user thanked author for this post.

UK Civil Service (verified Twitter account): Arrogant and offensive. Can you imagine having to work with these truth twisters?

The government has already vowed to crackdown on whoever tweeted it.

1 user thanked author for this post.

I have worked for Johnson, when he was Mayor of London.

Granted, there was a vast distance between me and him but working for political figures you might not personally like goes with working in a political field, even when you’re in the non-political part of it.

Anonymous wrote:

Arrogant and offensive. Can you imagine having to work with these truth twisters? Allegedly ó the UK Civil Service

Ahahahhahaah

That is pretty boss. 10x better than covfefe.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Anyone want to guess which paper printed this in defence of Cummings?

2 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, Dave

Torygraph? Daily Heil?

This thing is moving very, very fast.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

lorcan_nagle wrote:

Anyone want to guess which paper printed this in defence of Cummings?

Gove: I think we’ve all had enough of democracy

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

Ben wrote:

Torygraph? Daily Heil?

This thing is moving very, very fast.

You have to pick one

Well I saw someone from the Mail criticise Cummings on Twitter, while the Torygraph have been in Johnson’s pocket for ages now and were getting het up about Lockdown as soon as they started, so I’ll go for the Torygraph.

Correct

Ah, well that decides the new ranking of vileness, the Torygraph gets ‘promoted’.

1 user thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle

Viciously funny and accurate:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/24/no-dignity-no-future-boris-forsakes-leadership-to-protect-cummings

2 users thanked author for this post.

Dave

I wouldn’t usually repost any content from Renowned Shitrag™ the Daily Mail, but it was interesting to see this morning that Johnson’s actions over Cummings are too much even for them.

Now if you’ll excuse me I’m going to go look up the Hairy Bikers recipe that will cure coronavirus.

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd

I am disappointed by the Hairy Bikers

4 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, DavidM, Todd, Dave

Ben wrote:

I am disappointed by the Hairy Bikers

If there was one thing the country thought it could rely on.

4 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Ben, DavidM, Todd

Martin Smith wrote:

UK Civil Service (verified Twitter account): Arrogant and offensive. Can you imagine having to work with these truth twisters?

The government has already vowed to crackdown on whoever tweeted it.

J. K. Rowling has promised that if the person is identified she will give them a year’s salary.

You couldn’t make this up.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian

So, guys, what have we not tried to put this fire out? Napalm? Capital idea!

5 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Dave, Todd, DavidM

Ben wrote:

So, guys, what have we not tried to put this fire out? Napalm? Capital idea!

“We dropped a kind of shopping centre over the hole.”

“An underwater shopping centre?”

“An underwater shopping centre. We fitted it over the hole.”

“And did that work?”

“No, but it was a brilliant idea!”

“In what sense whas it brilliant?”

“Well, we know that doesn’t work, we won’t be trying that again.”

Source.

3 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Ben, Todd

If anything I think Cummings has just made things worse with his press conference. Lots that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny, and no hint of any kind of contrition (which you would expect if he thinks he has a hope of keeping his job – but I just don’t think it’s in his nature).

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Ben

I was wrong, they weren’t adding napalm, they went straight to the white phosphorus.

4 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd, Dave

He was a half hour late for the press conference because the dog ate his homework and he would’ve finished his essay on the bus but was only thinking of the people and any way the media are hounding him so it’s their fault and he would’ve been there sooner and known all the answers for the test honest, miss, no, truly, sir, but his wife kept talking and his wee one wanted to play Minecraft and it was supposed to be his turn to build the castle because Boris said he could be king of the castle which oh no, forgot, he meant to say that’s why they drove in the wrong direction to test if his eyes were okay for sight-seeing driving but he’s not sorry because he’s utterly shameless and anyway didn’t do anything wrong in the first place but at the same time he made mistakes but doesn’t think so.

5 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, DavidM, Ben, Dave

3 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd, Ben

This is quite the burn:

I also expect a claim of misquoting to follow if this finally impacts as reading incredibly badly:

“Cummings and his wife did not try to seek help with childcare in London before driving to Durham, he said.

‘I don’t think it would be reasonable to ask some friend to come and expose themselves to a deadly disease when a 17-year-old niece has offered to do it for me.’ “

4 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd, DavidM, Dave

Ben wrote:

This is quite the burn:

I also expect a claim of misquoting to follow if this finally impacts as reading incredibly badly:

“Cummings and his wife did not try to seek help with childcare in London before driving to Durham, he said.

‘I don’t think it would be reasonable to ask some friend to come and expose themselves to a deadly disease when a 17-year-old niece has offered to do it for me.’ “

Not even Jonathan Pies take on this is going to top the actual quote.

What I find most convincing, when someone is giving you an absolutely definitely true and complete account of their own personal experiences, is them having to have an agreed prepared written account of it in front of them to constantly refer to.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith, lorcan_nagle, Ben

And he still got his account wrong although I doubt he realises.

All his referring to exceptional circumstances – he views himself as exceptional.

4 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, lorcan_nagle, Ben

Anonymous wrote:

he views himself as exceptional.

He does come across as an exceptional twat.

5 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Dave, DavidM, Ben

I like how Professor Robert West summarises this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/may/25/cummings-row-risks-breach-of-public-trust-says-psychology-expert

Robert West, a professor of health psychology at University College London’s Institute of Epidemiology and Health, who sits on the advisory group on behavioural science for Sage told the Guardian: “From a public health perspective what we now have to recognise is that central government probably cannot be trusted to provide leadership, and other agencies, including local and regional government, are going to have to work together to make up for this. It will be difficult and maybe things will change but as things stand there is a leadership vacuum in the heart of government.”

…  He noted that ministers got a lot of flak for changing the advisory slogan from “stay at home” to “stay alert” as they began to talk of easing the lockdown. “And rightly so, because it is exactly the kind of thing that you would have hoped they would have consulted with their scientific advisers on, in order to come up with something that would be meaningful at a really important stage of the process.”
West said Spi-B was never asked about the change of slogan. “The sense is that there’s another parallel group of people who are effectively calling the shots here and have their own views on how things should go, but they are not necessarily experts in communication or behavioural science or all the things they would need to be.
“They are treating the whole health crisis as though it were a political crisis. If it’s a political crisis, what you do is try to manage your reputation. If it’s a health crisis you focus on saving lives, at whatever cost to your political reputation.”

4 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, DavidM, Dave, lorcan_nagle

I see that the latest news developments detail how Cummings’ much-mooted predictions of coronavirus risks in 2019 were actually edited into an old 2019 article in April 2020.

He’s like a stupid person’s idea of what a clever person looks like.

4 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, DavidM, Christian

Exactly why Floppybo and Gove et all will back him to the hilt.

It’s not as if he’s acting out of character. Cum is one of the chief instigators of Brexit: leave when the best policy is to remain.

Dave wrote:

He’s like a stupid person’s idea of what a clever person looks like.

Aren’t they all?

The more I see of BoJo, the more I think he has a very similar mindset of someone who is deep into substance abuse. It’s obfuscation all the time, telling the same stories all over, neglecting responsibility for his (or his cohorts) actions, etc. I wonder what his DoC (drug of choice) is.

It’s probably money.

Anonymous wrote:

I wonder what his DoC (drug of choice) is.

Power and sex.

Nope. You’re almost there but you’re in turn obfuscating based on your own experience.

I have a very limited experience of money, I’m afraid.

Pies take is in:

2 users thanked author for this post.

Christian, DavidM

3 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, Ben

Daily Star getting in on the action:

I don’t think this is going to go away as quick as the government assumed and they’re not getting support from the places they usually rely on.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Todd, DavidM, Ben, Dave

This one is pretty good.

2 users thanked author for this post.

Ben, lorcan_nagle

I know some people don’t like Rogan, but his podcast with Snowden is great. Also Rogan mostly keeps quiet.

 

I like yoh a lot more than i like Joe Rogan, Arjan .

Which is to say I like you a lot and think Rogan is an idiot nobface

1 user thanked author for this post.

Todd

Thanks! I like you too.

 

Why is he an idiot nobface? I don’t mind, I think he is a bit stupid myself, but he’s not that bad in my estimation. Anyway the Snowden thing is really just Snowden talking, so even if you hate Rogan it is interesting.

I think he’s intentionally branded himself as a niche male anti-intellectual intellectual to engage with an audience that would not normally engage with certain topics  but he obfuscate his opinion as fact and abuses his audience who think they’re getting a fresh take on the facts from someone that can uniquely speak to them when it’s usually just some dumb opinion with the occasional level of insight you would find in any Washington post article.

Hence: idiot nobface.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Well most of what comes out of Rogan’s mouth isn’t very clever, or it can be downright stupid. But some of the guests are interesting.

He does get lots of interesting interview guests which is part of the sell.

I can’t listen to him on principle because I refuse to support that type of ‘journalism’.

 

From Cracked.com:
Joe Rogan Signs $100 Million Deal With Spotify, Thinks Things Won’t Change

It’s really his face that I dont like.

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd

I already knew he was a wanker.

3 users thanked author for this post.

Dave, lorcan_nagle, Todd

Speaking of wankers:

Giuliani calls for mayor, governor to resign over Minneapolis riots, says Dems ‘incapable’ of keeping order

2 users thanked author for this post.

lorcan_nagle, Todd

Anonymous wrote:

He does get lots of interesting interview guests which is part of the sell.

I can’t listen to him on principle because I refuse to support that type of ‘journalism’.

 

I like the format though. These long discussions about random shit, with interesting people from a range of professions, artists, comedians, politicians, etc. What are some other podcasts that do this?

JRCarter wrote:

Speaking of wankers:

Giuliani calls for mayor, governor to resign over Minneapolis riots, says Dems ‘incapable’ of keeping order

Jesus. I mean, we always knew Guliani was a terrible person, and becoming Trump’s representative showed it more clearly than ever recently, but still…

Giuliani told “Hannity” Friday that “no one” feels more strongly than him about the injustice toward Floyd, but added that the policies of “progressive Democrats” are to blame “for the violence that has ensued.”

“Progressive Democrats are incapable of keeping their people safe,” he said, “because they have criminal-friendly policies that are pathetic, that are dangerous, and now we are seeing the results not only there [in Minneapolis], but watch the cities that start burning.

“They are all going to be run by so-called progressives, idiot Democrats who let criminals out of jail, who set bail for murderers and encourage exactly this kind of thing.”

So basically, the problem according to Giuliani is being too nice and understanding towards criminals in a situation that exploded because cops killed a guy for nothing. You have to be a special kind of twisted for that kind of logic. Somehow, I doubt that “no one feels more strongly” about Floyd’s death.

5 users thanked author for this post.

Martin Smith, JRCarter, Todd, Will_C, lorcan_nagle