Politics 2024/25 General Election Voting Intention (2022)

[Scouse]

The bit where you say "haha I can't believe you're taking him seriously" is where you said it's ok. "Lol it's just Trump, guys". He's the fucking US President, his outrageous bullshit shouldn't be normalised just because this thing is more outrageous than whatever the last outrageous thing was.

I'm not saying it's OK. I've explicitly said (multiple times) that I don't think it's OK. I responded to your message and said, underlined, that I don't support Trump.

Can we now take that as read please?

However, where we differ is that I'm not going to continue to be outraged by it. It is what it is. He is what he is. This is how he's going to continue to operate and there's fuck all we can do about it. I'm not going to continue to get outrageously pissed off by it - because it could cloud my judgement of what's actually going on.

I'd like it to be different, but it isn't. So I'm not going to lose my shit over something I understand and, whilst it's shit, have accepted. And it helps me see what's actually happening more clearly - instead of knee-jerk "everything is utterly shit" rage that seems to be infesting our national discourse.

It isn't. - Ukraine is still resisting Russia, because of the US. Europe is finally growing a set of balls and ramping up military spending so we can actually be a relevant force and not rely totally on the US - because of Trump.

I hate his methods. I really dislike the man himself. I dislike many of his objectives - but not all of them. But like what he's doing or dislike what he's doing - he's getting results.

 

[Scouse]

On greenland, @caLLous:

Greenland is over 3 times the size of Texas and has a grand total of 70 miles of paved roads. It'll be decades before extracting minerals is anywhere near the table, let alone on it.

And a country's inhabitants can't sell their country ffs. Greenland could vote to be independent of Denmark but not to join the US and anyway, there are Greenlandic/Danish/international laws about paying people to vote one way or another. On top of all of that, the US doesn't exactly have a stellar track record when it comes to its treatment of Native peoples on its own turf and Greenland is mostly Indigenous, so... not really compatible. It's not all about money.

I agree that it'll take a long time to extract minerals. But that's the reason for it. It's a rare day that we go after a country if it's not about resources. Iraq war was oil - and we deposed a despotic, but secular government which allowed women to work and be educated - to get that oil.

For your second sentence. I disagree with pretty much everything about it - including your call to "laws". Law is just some rules we made up. We can rewrite them whenever we like - and we do. That's literally what governments do. And countries can be and have been sold. If the people are to be represented correctly and democratically (lol, like that'll happen) - then the only people who can sell their country should be their own inhabitants. And Denmark has treated the inhabitants of Greenland disgustingly in very recent memory. If the Greenlanders could vote to kick out Denmark (regardless of the US) they might well do so.

It kind of IS all about money. Money and resources.

 

[Scouse]

Seven facepalms!

I hope you had an orgasm after that m8

 

[Embattle]

You missed one.

 

[Overdriven]

No one facepalms me.

I'll be in the corner facepalming myself whilst I cry to the proposed Reform national anthem of "God Bless Nigel Farage".

 

[DaGaffer]

My first (semi-serious) point on this was he could try do it democratically - he could offer $1m for each person in Greenland and have them vote, and a majority would likely say "yes". He'd be able to pick it up for less than the cost of HS2. And buying countries, whilst unusual in our lifetime, isn't that big of a deal. There's plenty of precedent. And, frankly, it'd just be another border change amongst the thousands. If it was done that way - with the people themselves having a say - then I wouldn't blink tbh.

No they wouldn't. Maybe €10M each and they can keep their Danish passports. $1M would be eaten by health and education costs. The other issue is they wouldn't be a state, not for decades, they'd be a US overseas territory and completely reliant on the US for food and medical supplies, ask the American colonies in the Pacific how that's gone.

Anyway that's irrelevant. The whole world should be telling him to fuck off on general principles at this point, if for no other reason than to send a clear message to the American people to stop electing lunatics and put their fucking house in order. It won't work, MAGA would double down, but kissing America's arse doesn't work either (like at the idiot Nobel Prize woman) so you may as well be standing up instead of bent over, easier on the back.

 

[Scouse]

No they wouldn't. Maybe €10M each and they can keep their Danish passports. $1M would be eaten by health and education costs.

Not sure of your maths here.

they'd be a US overseas territory and completely reliant on the US for food and medical supplies,

I think they could afford it. The cost to Denmark for supporting Greenland is about $550m a year, which we'll agree is fuck all. And with all those sponds, I'm pretty sure suppliers will be falling over themsevles to continue to supply goods.

But it was a thought experiment anyway. I think an eminently sensible, peaceful and democratic solution which put the people first.

 

[Scouse]

Supersized illegal waste dumps hidden across English countryside

A BBC investigation uncovers how criminals are operating huge illegal rubbish tips across the country.

www.bbc.co.uk

"Discovered" lol. Each one of those farmers is taking a big backhander. It's an industrial scale.

It's all about the money.

Refuse disposal should be free - and if it's DIY / building, should be charged on the purchase of materials, not at the disposal end.

 

[Gwadien]

Angela Rayner to back calls for Burnham to be allowed to stand in by-election

The Greater Manchester mayor has until Saturday afternoon to decide if he wants to enter the contest to be Labour's candidate.

www.bbc.co.uk

Does she think this helps?

 

[Scouse]

The NEC could also insist that there should be an all-women shortlist of possible Labour candidates for a by-election because the majority of the party's MPs are currently men

This needs to die. It's why Rayner made it so far depite being a tit.

Anyway. Burnham would probably lose the byelection. And I'd hate him as PM too.

Principled man. Don't dislike him personally tho. Unlike Starmer.