leicsmac

It's so nice to have someone finally speak up and say what others were simply inferring. Say what you mean, mean what you say. On topic, this game is as bad as the previous one was good.

There's quite a few damn good channels on the topic of aviation safety. Usually it reads as a litany of errors that lead to these tragedies, rather than just one or two.

And Joey Barton facing some consequences for conspiratorial bullshit too. It's been a good week.

When someone considers some of the aspects from that past, perhaps the current situation isn't actually all that bad? (Do agree a lot of improvement is needed though.) On topic, that was a hugely entertaining game to watch as a neutral.

And condemning themselves and their descendants along with a lot of other people in the long term.

Murray:

Sounds astute to me. Here's hoping a solution can be applied. And soon. Covid was a very very small test of unified action that we barely, and at unnecessarily great cost, we passed. The next test might not be so small. And insistence on the primacy of family ties outvaluing all else just leads to evident misery so often anyway.

Quite. And then the question becomes... how do you address that situation? How do you stop the worldviews of people that are entirely built on a "different form of truth" (I'm being generous framing it that way) from becoming policy, before that policy causes a very great deal of harm to a great many people and possibly the biosphere itself?

And long should it remain so. ... up to the point those beliefs cause tangible harm to other people. Of course, that's a result of action rather than word (most of the time), but I'm not sure that waiting for that to occur should, for instance, Reform win enough votes to shape policy, is necessarily the best idea. Equally, while people are entitled to their beliefs, others and likewise equally entitled to pass judgement on those beliefs, as long as the above covenant isn't broken.

Nah, that would be uncharitable imo. The arguments are clearly well read and borne from a level mind, even if I categorically reject them because of my own placed value on both the future and other people out of my line of sight.

Nah, I like MfE, puts across some erudite positions, even if I don't agree with many. Can't quite grasp the logic of thinking the events in Washington DC on January 6th 2021 were anything other than a blatant attempt to overturn the results of a free and fair election at the at least implied behest of the losing candidate though... but to each their own.

The ascendancy of social media - utilised by people like Farage, Tate et al with success - has a large part to play there. Playing on the base short term self interest of the disaffected. I agree. But then everyone with at least half a brain knows that's not the only issue being discussed nor how it all plays out.

Sadly the playbook he's using has been proven effective at one point or another for most of the last century.

Agreed, but then that might depend on what exactly those stated (or even implied) needs are.

I agree. However, I'm more interested in it being done than that, given the cost of the consequences if it is not done anyway. Less quibble, more action.

That may end up being the case, but if it is, as per above you're going to have to pray like hell that they do not get a plurality of the vote large enough to craft policy, because that will be... rather consequential. Edit: I've said it before, I really, really hope I'm wrong about where this might all lead.

I despise even having to say this because it goes against everything I like about our species and I believed it once, but rational argument as is being advocated for here only works when you have an agreed point of fact/truth to rely upon. The events of 2016 and subsequently have shown that even the very idea of truth and fact can and will be subverted for nefarious purposes, and when that happens "winning the argument" in any significant way becomes much, much harder. What to do to alleviate the issue instead? Damned if I know, but we need a solution - and fast. Perhaps the best way is to do what is possible and hope - really, really hope - that is enough to win over enough of a plurality of those not quite committed when it comes to policymaking

Expectation is they'll win one or two seats at best, thankfully. Who knows what the landscape will be like in five years time though?

... should have gone for Wenger when we had the chance?

Anyway, this group is wide open now.

Well, I'm paraphrasing a rather old phrase, but a bit more than twenty years ago the two sentiments did go hand in hand. Monkey chants and bananas. Perhaps progress, in football as in life, isn't such a bad thing.

And hopefully it might cause a little more clarity on the handball rule, too.

Yep. "No blacks, no women, no Irish" in the beautiful game, the way it used to be, right? (Well, maybe that last one is apparently acceptable.) Great game though! Had it all.

Queens this week, one of my favourite tournaments. Shame Norrie couldn't get the job done against Raonic, hope Murray can put in one last good showing.

I don't disagree, and it's a difficult issue, but again I think it a reaction rather than a statement in a vacuum. Whether that mitigates is obviously down to the beholder. On topic, agree with the general sentiment that we've had some cracking games so far.