Another Drive4show 'Anything goes' thread

[Diggers]

First topic message reminder :

Re Sterling, he’s got more PL assists than any English player in the last year, 3rd most of anyone. As well as a shedload of goals, what a poopie player he is!!
Could this be it for Jose, I certainly hope so.

[McLaren]

Super

On the Stenson thing, again I just picked Stenson (maybe I should have said Scott, but he isn't a euro) as an example of handsome guy. I really didn't consider his marital status or his actual conquest list.  It was a half joking post about which golfer you think would be most likely to get embroiled in a #metoo allegation.  I again pretty jokingly said McGinley. I certainly didn't expect anyone to take it as seriously as you seem to have and in no way was I claiming it contained accurate biographical information.

This is weird one, even for you.

[Davie]

MMA is just WWE in a different guise - and boxing is going the same way

[super_realist]

Super

On the Stenson thing, again I just picked Stenson (maybe I should have said Scott, but he isn't a euro) as an example of handsome guy. I really didn't consider his marital status or his actual conquest list.  It was a half joking post about which golfer you think would be most likely to get embroiled in a #metoo allegation.  I again pretty jokingly said McGinley. I certainly didn't expect anyone to take it as seriously as you seem to have and in no way was I claiming it contained accurate biographical information.

This is weird one, even for you.

I don't take anything you say seriously Mac, I was pointing out for someone who demands facts and evidence from everyone else, you very rarely use any yourself.

[McLaren]

Mac, what an illogical view to take. 

By your logic, you should only be friends with people that you like 100%, you should only watch news you agree with 100%, you should only engage with politics you agree with 100%, you should only ever buy good in which you agree with the production methods, investment, views of the company 100%. 

No wonder you haven't achieved anything in your life, because if you go with your view on everything, then you are completely unopen to learning anything or changing your mind. You SHOULD watch things you don't agree with, you should engage with people like that, you shouldn't write people off simply because you don't agree with everything they happen to.

Writing people off on the basis of one statement or viewpoint is the pathetic "no platforming" technique used these days by wet universities, and it shows is that you're completely intolerant, which is exactly what the left wing (like you) always accuse the right of being. The irony is incredible.

Are you saying you agree with everything that is left wing? If so, that's even more stupid than writing someone off on the basis of one of their characteristics and shows how immature you are.

Super

Being right wing isn't one position, it is a whole string of times someone has failed to apply basic reasoning.

[super_realist]

Mac, Either side of the central divide has good ideas, it's not limited to whether you are right or left wing. To deny such a thing would be incredibly naïve, which of course you have shown to be.

You have said before that you'll disown someone simply because they hold position X, and will therefore disregard what they say about position Y or Z on the basis of holding position X, even if it happens to be something which might be interesting or insightful.

I thought you left wingers were supposed to be tolerant?

[navyblueshorts]

Mac, Either side of the central divide has good ideas, it's not limited to whether you are right or left wing. To deny such a thing would be incredibly naïve, which of course you have shown to be.

You have said before that you'll disown someone simply because they hold position X, and will therefore disregard what they say about position Y or Z on the basis of holding position X, even if it happens to be something which might be interesting or insightful.

I thought you left wingers were supposed to be tolerant?

Clearly. After all, Corbyn's Momentum Mafia are known for their extreme levels of tolerance to all others...

[beninho]

Surely it depends what position x,y,x are. If someone holds a view on abortion or tax issues, you would expect them to hold similar style views on other issues. Which is why people on right/left wings are usually against each other. Tolerance of views is fine but hard if someone else has zero tolerance. Someone with zero tolerance is usually not going to have any views worth listening to because they are clearly unreasonable.

But I'm a left of centre liberal and neither political party speaks to me.

[McLaren]

Surely it depends what position x,y,x are.

Exactly.  If someone is pro-life, pro-brexit, supports NHS privitization, questions immigration, any nationalism, anti-LGBT, wants low tax rates, anti-feminist, thinks the GFC was a sovereign debt problem or any number of other idiotic ideas it would be fair to assume their overall reasoning abilities are pretty poor.  



And Super, if there are good ideas on both sides, give me the 5 best right wing/conservative ideas relevant to the UK?

[super_realist]

Surely it depends what position x,y,x are.

Exactly.  If someone is pro-life, pro-brexit, supports NHS privitization, questions immigration, any nationalism, anti-LGBT, wants low tax rates, anti-feminist, thinks the GFC was a sovereign debt problem or any number of other idiotic ideas it would be fair to assume their overall reasoning abilities are pretty poor.  



And Super, if there are good ideas on both sides, give me the 5 best right wing/conservative ideas relevant to the UK?

Mac, I'm not here to support the Tories or give their best ideas, (though they legalised Gay Marriage, Right to Buy, Raising tax threshold at the low end, reduced the deficit, reduced unemployment, lowering corporation tax) but you seem unable to give anyone who you disagree with on point X, any credit for what they do on stance Y, even if it is good. You even said you disregard all the good stuff said by Hitchens because you think he supported the Iraq war in the past.

Let's not forget, it was the left which introduced fees for Students, something which probably has had the biggest effect on the generation in which you are part of and no doubt impacted on your fictional MSc, and will continue to have much more than say the effect of an unpopular Tory policy such as the bedroom tax.

You're a bit like GPB in slating everything European and being unable to give credit where it's due, whereas sane thinking people can the see the good and bad on either side of the political divide. You seem incapable of seeing the blatant bad of the left, whilst picking out the obvious bad done by the right and ignoring the good done by the right and championing the good done by the left.

[Diggers]

SNP back a second referendum, works for me. I couldn’t give a flying one about ignoring the publics opinion, we knew the square root of jack during the first one. Now, relatively speaking, we’re experts.
Even if May gets a deal it won’t get through the Commons, something has gotta give soon.

[beninho]

Reduced the deficit? Have they? You think austerity policies are good? Lowering corporation tax good? Right yo buy is fricking horrendous.

The thing is though centre right tories would vote for things like gsy marriage and abortion rules plenty of the further right would not. Issues tend to be with the right wing not centrists. Unfortunately centrists are being overshadowed in politics nowadays.

[beninho]

Should be a second referendum once terms are agreed.

[Diggers]

Early days but we could have a genuine title race this year (PL and League One). Maybe it’s me but the Arsenal players just look a bit fitter? Great starts by Emery and Sarri, Spurs not playing great but up there a well, City and Liverpool will be there for the duration, not much between them. Should be interesting.

[super_realist]

Should be a second referendum once terms are agreed.

Why would that happen? I know most of us would like to have one, but it goes against democracy to have one, and given that democracy has a long history in the UK, we can't really be seen to go against it just because we don't like it. That's an SNP situation of just keep holding referendums until you get the result you want.
If we do that, and the Remain was to win, then we're simply going to get the Leave campaign backing yet another referendum. It's never ending.

Like it or not, we're leaving the EU.

Of course the SNP support a second referendum, they'll clutch at any straw that they think will strengthen their independence agenda, but they're no nearer getting a consensus on that in Scotland. People are laughing at the SNP up here, because they are plastic politicians

[beninho]

The SNP should want a second referendum, if scotland in general voted to stay in they have to bang that drum.

Democracy is not about one vote lasting forever. If we dont like the redult we get a chance to vote again. Why should that not be the case here? People voted to leave, when they get the basis of what the agreement is, it shoukd be put back.out for a furthet vote. If that gets voted down, no reason why another one cannot be held in the future.

[wiretapper]

An excellent article on Edin Dzeko and growing up in war torn Bosnia

https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/edin-dzeko-you-are-not-dead

[navyblueshorts]

Surely it depends what position x,y,x are.

Exactly.  If someone is pro-life, pro-brexit, supports NHS privitization, questions immigration, any nationalism, anti-LGBT, wants low tax rates, anti-feminist, thinks the GFC was a sovereign debt problem or any number of other idiotic ideas it would be fair to assume their overall reasoning abilities are pretty poor.  



And Super, if there are good ideas on both sides, give me the 5 best right wing/conservative ideas relevant to the UK?

Rubbish. Someone could be an utter pillock, but by sheer chance have a great idea. You'd reject that purely on the basis of their other opinions rather than look at that one potentially great idea based on its own merits?? No wonder the World's FUBAR'd.

[navyblueshorts]

The SNP should want a second referendum, if scotland in general voted to stay in they have to bang that drum.  

Democracy is not about one vote lasting forever. If we dont like the redult we get a chance to vote again. Why should that not be the case here? People voted to leave, when they get the basis of what the agreement is, it shoukd be put back.out for a furthet vote. If that gets voted down, no reason why another one cannot be held in the future.

Of course there could be a second referendum on EU membership, but we aren't even out as a result of this one yet. I tend to think we're up the proverbial creek and I voted 'No', but to demand a second referendum on in/out before we've even enacted the first one is seriously asking for trouble. I think we'll suffer when we leave, but we don't know what the outcome(s) will actually be. We made our bed, we lie in it.

[kwinigolfer]

Early days but we could have a genuine title race this year (PL and League One). Maybe it’s me but the Arsenal players just look a bit fitter? Great starts by Emery and Sarri, Spurs not playing great but up there a well, City and Liverpool will be there for the duration, not much between them. Should be interesting.

I saw that Digs! Hope you're right about both. (P.S.: Any team playing without Ozil looks fitter . . . . . . )

Harking back to two months ago, the only bloke I see giving young British/Irish guys a chance, instead of the foreign legion, is Southgate; fewer British youngsters playing in the Prem than ever, and that's percolating down to the Championship. Sad to see.

[pedro]

It was pretty clear what the referendum was about: Remain or leave the EU. Leave won. It's ridicolous to have a new referendum. If you want to leave a party you leave, beacuse you already know what the party is about. You don't dump your wife and then come back and say you want her back because Tínder wasn't what you hoped. (well, some might do, and ironically it's probably the same airheads who voted leave)

We can agree that leaving the EU is stupid, but people should stop the moaning. It's democracy. You cannot sit on your high horse and claim that people didn't know what the vote was about or what the consequences would be. It is exactly what democracy is about: One person, one vote; stupid clever, high, low, black, white.

IMO it's a different story if you want to join a party. Here it would be ok to have multiple referendums until conditions are acceptable to the majority.

[McLaren]

Rubbish. Someone could be an utter pillock, but by sheer chance have a great idea

This is actually a very good point and something you come across often in the atheist community.  You get individuals who think realising there is no god is a great feat of rational thinking and therefore they must be a genius. They then apply this "genius" to other topics like politics or science and get things horribly wrong,not realising that coming to an atheist position is pretty simple stuff or that they got there by faulty reasoning.

I therefore agree that absence of the dumb arse positions I listed above is not reason enough to think the person is some sort of great mind. The batshittery of Corbyn disciples being a case in point.


But should someone hold one of the positions I listed earlier it would be a very good early indicator that we did not in any way share the same reasoning or morality.

[McLaren]

I don't understand how a second referendum would be undemocratic as long as normal parliamentary process was maintained.  As with any policy a party has to win a democratic election on the promise of carrying out a policy or face the consequences of carrying out a policy at the next democratic election. If a referendum is carried out it is by definition pretty demoncratic what with it being the people voting on something and then the parties that pushed for it would face the electorate at some point before or after.

Secondly I would not accept that setting policy in stone is democratic, especially one that would appear to be so damaging to the nation.

As for the SNP pushing for a second referendum it makes perfect sense given the Tory party made the argument that Scotland should vote NO in indyref to ensure continued membership of the EU and that the majority of people in Scotland voted to stay in the EU in the #brexit vote.  In fact isn't it the most democratic position they could take as it is actually listening to what the people have voted for in the past?

[navyblueshorts]

Where's the evidence that the vast majority of those voting out want to change their mind? I don't see it, and to try and suggest there should be a second referendum in the absence of that sort of sea change, is dangerous.

If you want to blame someone, blame the politicians of all stripes for the Neanderthal level of 'debate' that was had leading into the vote.

I keep hearing echos of Monty Python: "What has the EU every done for us? Yes, well, apart from the clean beaches, peace in Europe for ~70 years, improved air quality, the single market, economic growth, improved democracy and human rights etc etc...."

We voted out, and out we shall be.

[Davie]

I haven't heard any claims that "the vast majority" of leavers now want to remain - where did you get that from?

It is true however that there are a measurable number of leavers who have now changed their minds - just not a "vast majority".

I've yet to hear or any remainers changing their minds and now wanting to leave

[raycastleunited]

Just read the last page on this thread. Wow... lurching from politics to football to play fighting to Scottish stuff to Stenson's love life! Certainly an eclectic collection of topics!!!

[pedro]

I don't understand how a second referendum would be undemocratic as long as normal parliamentary process was maintained.  As with any policy a party has to win a democratic election on the promise of carrying out a policy or face the consequences of carrying out a policy at the next democratic election. If a referendum is carried out it is by definition pretty demoncratic what with it being the people voting on something and then the parties that pushed for it would face the electorate at some point before or after.

Secondly I would not accept that setting policy in stone is democratic, especially one that would appear to be so damaging to the nation.

As for the SNP pushing for a second referendum it makes perfect sense given the Tory party made the argument that Scotland should vote NO in indyref to ensure continued membership of the EU and that the majority of people in Scotland voted to stay in the EU in the #brexit vote.  In fact isn't it the most democratic position they could take as it is actually listening to what the people have voted for in the past?

Mac, we have representative democracy. Except when things are put out to referendum. Then we have direct democracy. You should not mix those two a la carte, then you have neither.

[pedro]

Just read the last page on this thread. Wow... lurching from politics to football to play fighting to Scottish stuff to Stenson's love life! Certainly an eclectic collection of topics!!!

Priceless really. Why read the newspaper?

[McLaren]

Mac, we have representative democracy. Except when things are put out to referendum. Then we have direct democracy. You should not mix those two a la carte, then you have neither.

But they are linked.  You vote for your MP, your MP votes in parliament to hold the referendum, or whatever policy, and then at next GE you can decide whether to vote for them or not.  Holding another referendum would follow that process and would therefore by democratic.

[navyblueshorts]

I haven't heard any claims that "the vast majority" of leavers now want to remain - where did you get that from?

It is true however that there are a measurable number of leavers who have now changed their minds - just not a "vast majority".

I've yet to hear or any remainers changing their minds and now wanting to leave

Think you need to re-read my post. I said I've seen no evidence that leavers want to change their minds.

[Davie]

Where's the evidence that the vast majority of those voting out want to change their mind?

This was the part I was referring to. I hadn't heard anyone claim a vast majority so wasn't sure why you were asking for evidence of it

[navyblueshorts]

Where's the evidence that the vast majority of those voting out want to change their mind?

This was the part I was referring to. I hadn't heard anyone claim a vast majority so wasn't sure why you were asking for evidence of it

I was suggesting there'd need to a vast majority changing their minds to warrant another referendum. There's been no evidence of such a change of heart, therefore shouldn't be another referendum.

[Diggers]

I don’t think anyone knows exactly who has or hasn’t changed their minds, obviously some will have either way. What matters is that we know a lot more, the referendum options should be deal (if we have one), no deal (moronic) and remain.
If enough want to stop leave it will show and they have a choice as to how. If the deal or no deal vote combined is more than remain then remains is off the table.

[navyblueshorts]

Any way one cuts it, it's a monumental screw up. Simply because of childish Tory party infighting over Europe, that they've never got over. The opposition are complete sh!te as well. What a country . Could be worse though I guess, we could have that tango'd berk, Trump....

[McLaren]

Not sure if we have ever done this on here but did anyone vote leave in the EU referendum?

And if you did vote to leave do you know wish you hadn't?


(For reference I voted to remain and have not changed my mind on that, so I guess I should also ask if any remainers have changed their mind or if non voters now have a position?)

[Diggers]

It was pretty clear what the referendum was about: Remain or leave the EU. Leave won. It's ridicolous to have a new referendum. If you want to leave a party you leave, beacuse you already know what the party is about. You don't dump your wife and then come back and say you want her back because Tínder wasn't what you hoped. (well, some might do, and ironically it's probably the same airheads who voted leave)

We can agree that leaving the EU is stupid, but people should stop the moaning. It's democracy. You cannot sit on your high horse and claim that people didn't know what the vote was about or what the consequences would be. It is exactly what democracy is about: One person, one vote; stupid clever, high, low, black, white.

IMO it's a different story if you want to join a party. Here it would be ok to have multiple referendums until conditions are acceptable to the majority.

I hate the stop moaning argument with a passion. It’s moaning a.......... like Farage that contrived a convoluted scenario where the Tories held a referendum. They would still be moaning if the vote hadn’t gone their way. So, I reserve the right to moan and agitate and argue about the outcome...and anyone who doesn’t like it can just stop moaning about it!!

[NedB-H]

The only thing more stupid than leaving the EU was holding a referendum on it in the first place. There’s the old Churchill quote that representative democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others, and it’s right, holding single-issue referenda is much worse.
Firstly, we’re now lumbered with a policy decided upon by ill-informed joe publics instead of any informed experts. And secondly we’ve tied ourselves to it irreversibly. If a government does something stupid they have the chance to u-turn their way out of it, and we have the chance to vote them out within a few years. But we can’t go back on Brexit without 50%, give or take, crying foul about undemocratic process.

The best thing I can see is to go along with Brexit as far as we can in the hope that it all falls apart at the end. Labour in opposition are doing a decent job of being noncommittal over the whole thing. I’m still mildly hopeful of an early election with Labour and Lib Dem gains followed by the two combining to get something like a Norway deal. That can still be presented as Brexit but doesn’t change much in practice.

[Diggers]

I actually feel that ardent Brexiteers, when faced with the reality that the deal presented will be Chequers lite (when they already hate Chequers) would rather remain, or certainty delay the process.
And I’d all the contemptible characters involved, is there a more creepy, disingenuous human than Reed Mogg? And people think this guy wants to give us back our freedom?

[super_realist]

The SNP should want a second referendum, if scotland in general voted to stay in they have to bang that drum.  

Democracy is not about one vote lasting forever. If we dont like the redult we get a chance to vote again. Why should that not be the case here? People voted to leave, when they get the basis of what the agreement is, it shoukd be put back.out for a furthet vote. If that gets voted down, no reason why another one cannot be held in the future.

Then London should want a second referendum too? You can't just demand a referendum because Derby, Barrow or Lyme Regis or wherever want one. Scotland isn't a special case.

You're quite right, a decision shouldn't have to last forever, but trying to force a second referendum when the outcome of the first hasn't even been deployed yet would be undemocratic. If you carry on like that and have another referendum, then the Leave mob will be asking for yet another immediately. It's a circular position.

I would like to stay in the EU, but you can't just have referendums every time there's a bit of an issue about how it's panning out. That's why we elect representatives.

[Diggers]

When the representatives act like brats who can’t agree anything - which is why we are where we are at - then why should we have any faith in their decision- or more likely, lack of one.

[pedro]

Firstly, we’re now lumbered with a policy decided upon by ill-informed joe publics instead of any informed experts.

Ned you can't say important decisions should be left to experts. Then we may as well have a technocrat goverment. The Brexit vote was a lot about emotions and sentimentality. Just as people voting for the left and far right is a lot about emotions.

[super_realist]

When the representatives act like brats who can’t agree anything - which is why we are where we are at - then why should we have any faith in their decision- or more likely, lack of one.

I have even less reason to trust the UK public. Have you ever done Jury Duty for example, and those are the type of people voting.

[McLaren]

When the representatives act like brats who can’t agree anything - which is why we are where we are at - then why should we have any faith in their decision- or more likely, lack of one.

I have even less reason to trust the UK public. Have you ever done Jury Duty for example, and those are the type of people voting.

The idea of a jury selected at random from the general public deciding your fate in a trial is truly terrifying.  The standard of the average British person is just dire.

[navyblueshorts]

When the representatives act like brats who can’t agree anything - which is why we are where we are at - then why should we have any faith in their decision- or more likely, lack of one.

I have even less reason to trust the UK public. Have you ever done Jury Duty for example, and those are the type of people voting.

The idea of a jury selected at random from the general public deciding your fate in a trial is truly terrifying.  The standard of the average British person is just dire.

And again, the same stereotyping. Jurists may not have your unbelievable academic background, but you might be surprised at how sensible some of them can be. Sure, there are dullards too, but you'd rather some sort of Star Chamber? Or people like Rees-Mogg or Johnson? After all, they are at least academically smart so surely OK for you eh?

If nothing else, the 'average Brit' may not exhibit your obvious prejudices.

[McLaren]

If I was from France or Scandinavia it wouldn't scare me so much but come on the Brits are pretty simple minded.

It pains me to say it, and they could well ignore their own reasoning skills due to political bias, but Boris and JRM probably have the mental capacity to understand the arguments made in court and the difference between not guilty and innocent.

[navyblueshorts]

If I was from France or Scandinavia it wouldn't scare me so much but come on the Brits are pretty simple minded.

It pains me to say it, and they could well ignore their own reasoning skills due to political bias, but Boris and JRM probably have the mental capacity to understand the arguments made in court and the difference between not guilty and innocent.

Ah yes, no thickos in France or Scandinavia. Also, no intellectual giants who'd have biases, conscious or unconscious eh? I'd hate to be in the dock with you as a jurist as your prejudices would be dangerous.

[McLaren]

If I was from France or Scandinavia it wouldn't scare me so much but come on the Brits are pretty simple minded.

It pains me to say it, and they could well ignore their own reasoning skills due to political bias, but Boris and JRM probably have the mental capacity to understand the arguments made in court and the difference between not guilty and innocent.

Ah yes, no thickos in France or Scandinavia. Also, no intellectual giants who'd have biases, conscious or unconscious eh? I'd hate to be in the dock with you as a jurist as your prejudices would be dangerous.

I literally said the opposite "they could well ignore their own reasoning skills due to political bias".

[super_realist]

When the representatives act like brats who can’t agree anything - which is why we are where we are at - then why should we have any faith in their decision- or more likely, lack of one.

I have even less reason to trust the UK public. Have you ever done Jury Duty for example, and those are the type of people voting.

The idea of a jury selected at random from the general public deciding your fate in a trial is truly terrifying.  The standard of the average British person is just dire.

I did it a few years ago and the majority of the people on the jury (15 in Scotland) should have actually been the ones  in the dock. Actual scum who paid no attention to the trial, and it wasn't just those who were selected that were scum, it was the 200 or so who made up the pool to pick from that were largely scum. In the trial I was part of, there were only other 2 people who were remotely educated. Some even wore a tracksuit to the chamber.

Mac, I've spent a lot of time in Scandinavia, and while they certainly appear to be better educated and more rounded than your average Brit, France is full of total scum if you'd ever bothered to look away from the tourist areas. Not as bad as Britain from what I've seen, but I've seen a lot of deadbeats in France.

[McLaren]

Super

It's scary isn't it?  Jail shouldn't be the deterrent to crime it should be the dumb arses that would have to weigh the evidence in your trial.

[NedB-H]

Firstly, we’re now lumbered with a policy decided upon by ill-informed joe publics instead of any informed experts.

Ned you can't say important decisions should be left to experts. Then we may as well have a technocrat goverment. The Brexit vote was a lot about emotions and sentimentality. Just as people voting for the left and far right is a lot about emotions.

We basically do have a technocrat government though. The senior civil servants do the day to day running of the country far more than the politicians do. We just elect people who tell the civil servants which direction to go in. And it works pretty well for the most part. “Direct democracy” is a godawful idea because people don’t take account of the way policies affect each other. Representative democracy turns all the policies into a workable system, that’d never happen if the public had their say on every policy all of the time, without thinking through the consequences. A Corbyn government will prove that...

[super_realist]

Super

It's scary isn't it?  Jail shouldn't be the deterrent to crime it should be the dumb arses that would have to weigh the evidence in your trial.

You wouldn't have believed it Mac, old hags desperate to get out of the jury room for a fag and taking no consideration of the evidence, just "let's get on it with it so I can get home to fry up my fellas tea". Jurors wearing jeans etc. It's terrifying to know that such people are in charge of your fate should you end up in court for something. What's worse is you are FORCED to endure their company for the entire day, you are not permitted to even leave them at lunch.

I don't think professional jurors would be a bad idea, or at least a large pool of properly vetted people who meet a minimum requirement for intelligence and an ability to take it seriously.

[Sponsored content]