Jump to content

Chomper Higgot

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    37,475
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    39

Everything posted by Chomper Higgot

  1. Well he is at the moment. But there’s something else, parties are elected on their manifesto. People who voted Tory voted for the party manifesto, regardless of who eventually gets to be PM. Sunak is performing multiple U-Turns on the manifesto on which the Tories were elected.
  2. No, but they vote for a party in the knowledge of who the PM is.
  3. So you accept yet another example of the UK relinquishing any kind of moral authority on the world stage? While ignoring investment in green technologies: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/NEW-INVESTMENT-IN-RENEWABLE-ENERGY-BY-COUNTRY-AND-ASSET-CLASS-2016-AND-GROWTH-ON-2015_fig8_318987792
  4. Upsetting a major Tory donor, not a wise move Rishi: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/sep/23/major-tory-donor-says-he-will-not-back-sunak-due-to-green-u-turn-madness
  5. When you ignore a reality that doesn’t match your self inflicted grievance.
  6. I doubt he’ll have his bail revoke, just yet. My guess is he’ll be handed a significant slap and warned his next transgression will land him in the slammer. The judge will be keen to demonstrate proportionality, but Trump will transgress again, it’s what he does. After a lifetime of never ever being held accountable for anything he’s having difficulty learning the new rules.
  7. Kamala Harris, getting it done for Americans. I expect the Alt-Right to rant against this even though very many rightwing voters, and particularly those on low incomes, will benefit from this Harris initiative: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/09/21/press-call-by-vice-president-harris-on-an-announcement-to-ease-the-burden-of-medical-debt-on-american-family-budgets/
  8. Only if you believe Trump’s affront to decency, the constitution and the rule of law are doing something right. Harris is a: 1 Bright 2 Articulate 3 Mixed Race 4 Woman in power There’s the 4 core reasons the Alt-right hate her.
  9. The extremists in the GOP are getting their directions from Trump. He’s just posted this on his failing ‘Truth Social’ - his panicked caps included: “IF REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP, INCLUDING THE DISASTER WE HAVE IN THE SENATE, MITCH MCCONNELL, TOGETHER WITH KEVIN M, & THE RNC (FINALLY!), DON’T TAKE ACTION NOW, WE HAVE TO THROW EVERYBODY OUT.”
  10. When have I ever said that the guilt or innocence of Trump should not be decided by a jury?
  11. Opinions differ. The vitriolic response she receives from the alt-right suggests she’s doing something right.
  12. Odd then that white makes make up the vast majority of senior political positions?
  13. Put him to trial, if he’s found guilty lock him up, if he’s found innocent let him get back to work. However, with now two allegations against him, replace him for a new candidate at the next election.
  14. A very curious argument to try to put in someone else’s mouth. I wonder what triggered it?
  15. There’s no such thing as ‘the best qualified’, there’s a range of candidates who are all qualified and all bring something different to the job. The only time we here the rightwing bleating about ‘the best qualified’ is when the candidate isn’t a white male.
  16. Another extreme rightwing populist German, just what the world needs.
  17. If I made statement I could not substantiate I would withdraw it. What I would not do is resort to directing thinly veiled expletives at the individual who pointed out my error.
  18. Thanks Nauseus, I got a good smile out of that. I often think the auto-speller has a sense of humour.
  19. I take it that your resort to thinly disguised expletives is you accepting that there is nothing in the article remotely resembling your claimed “Only the losses of 10% are mentioned, made to look substantial by using monetary figures, not the value of the remaining 90%.” You made it up.
  20. I’ve read it. There is no statement in the article that in anyway resembles your claim: “Only the losses of 10% are mentioned, made to look substantial by using monetary figures, not the value of the remaining 90%.” Did you make that up?
  21. Can you point to the bit in the article that states, as you claim: “Only the losses of 10% are mentioned, made to look substantial by using monetary figures, not the value of the remaining 90%.”
  22. Let me know when you have something to add to the discussion.
  23. You are mistaking identifying the holes in your own argument as ‘sliding right’.
×
×
  • Create New...