leicsmac

That's not the only thing they should say, but I think the rest would be a mite undiplomatic. Would have to look into that. It's from the 80's, as well. I think there's at least some who compass that way in the UK who are fully aware of how damaging Trump is to their "brand" and the world at large and so want nothing to do with him, but yes, some more noise from them would be very much appreciated.

Exactly right. And it's fed into the whole "there is no such thing as society" stance that's been around since the 80s, and resulted in a critical lack of trust between people. That doesn't end well. Not often, probably not ever.

I tend to find it often used by the self-interested against those who engage in acts of selflessness, as if they can't fathom that other human beings aren't all driven to act self-centred in the way that they do and that it must be some kind of show or trick with hidden personal gain.

It was clear from the very start (as in early 2017) that this administration has no honour, only self interest, and I'm just befuddled by the amount of people who tried (and still try) to give them the benefit of any doubt somehow.

I get that. Anyhow, just more proof, if any more were needed, as to how Trump and his administration cannot be in any way relied upon by the UK or anyone else outside their very small and self centred circle.

...I think he was being ironic WRT the habit of the US looking to "liberate" nations on a reasonably regular basis.

https://www.reuters.com/world/pentagon-email-floats-suspending-spain-nato-other-steps-over-iran-rift-source-2026-04-24/

And now for something a bit lighter: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czjwz8we1zzo Whoops.

Remind me, is the result of the deputy PMs intellect (or lack thereof) policy decisions based on antivax sentiment, climate change ignorance and runaway nationalism that is taking lives as we speak? Until then, I'm not really sure this is a comparison with any kind of point.

Too many people thinking it's like a game of Football Manager.

And therein lies a problem, yes. The advance of tech in general and of social media and AI in particular have taken an issue that people since Plato have struggled with, and multiplied both the issue and the consequences by an order of magnitude or more.

And this is why statistical analysis needs to be more taught in schools. There's a lot of misinterpreting of data - some wilful, some not - that then appears to drive both voting and policy decisions.

Also, some of the stuff that Palantir is coming out with right now is flat out scary. That they have any power at all, much less as much is they have, is a serious problem.

This stuff belongs on a comedy show, not a situation where people like this are making decisions that affect all life on this earth.

Welcome to the "post truth world"!

This is true. May the powers that govern the universe help us, because it really seems like we can't help ourselves.

These are all factual arguments, but another fact remains that every other candidate has more flaws (politically and/or personally) than he does, imo.

Repeated for emphasis, unless someone has a name that hasn't been thought of yet.

And it looks like The Onion are going to finally take full possession of the InfoWars IP. Great stuff. Now Alex Jones can start paying what he owes to the Sandy Hook victims.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cge0grppe3po There is no war. There is only the harvest. Or the grift.

There's a lot of something in this, too.

The only figure across any of the political landscape (including all parties) that seems to appear to be suitable is Burnham. Not sure what the mechanics involved would be to get him in, though.

Well, I think it's more the prospective rapists that visited that site rather than the news agency reporting on it that are the cvnts in this case... but glad there's broad agreement here

I'd be most interested in knowing why Karp, Thiel, both Stephen and Katie Miller and anyone who visited that website that CNN wrote about don't count, then.