Guest Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 Just now, Strokes said: Exactly, that proves my point entirely. Only if you read my post as if I meant it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 (edited) 1 minute ago, toddybad said: Only if you read my post as if I meant it How else am i meant to read it, explain it to me. Edited 2 November 2017 by Strokes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl the Llama Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 20 minutes ago, Strokes said: When it suits me, just like most people in here The foreign Secretary doesn't influence the budget or inact policy though and this government may not be in power by the time any of the savings from the EU come to be spent. So its a nonsense argument, as you well know. Just because we voted to leave the EU, does not mean that everything that vote leave or leave.eu said/promised/pledged was in anyway believed or endorsed by the voters. That is clearly a job for a government and we have had a general election since, which it was in no partys manifesto. Anyone who did believe it to be pledge and a possibility (of which i think there are none) should probably look at re-educating themselves because its pretty basic knowledge that a campaign group cannot make pledges, regardless of who may be leading them. It's not a nonsense argument though: Obviously you are correct that it was in no way a binding clause, however one of the most vocal brexiteers round my way liked to make the point that the NHS bus was brilliantly clever because it quoted an exaggerated figure which forced the remain group to clarify the actual figures being sent to the EU and in his mind that constituted a defeat for remain because they were admitting to putting money into the EU project. His point was that any net loss in that direction was a justification for leaving so that some of that money could be put into the NHS amongst other UK based projects, regardless of the actual figures in question. Now I'm not saying it was his only reason for voting to leave, far from it, but it formed a significant part of debate and I can't imagine he was the only person to view it that way. Though I hope you're right about the government no longer being in power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovril Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 Loving the discussions on semantic nuance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 Just now, Strokes said: How elseam i meant to read it, explain it to me. Everybody saw "yes we can" as meaning "we will". Or as a minimum "we'll be doing everything we can to make it happen". With the £350m pledge, look, I'll level with you, I honestly couldn't care less. BUT it was very obviously a disingenuous attempt to win votes. The £350m ignored the fact 2/3 of it came back into the UK and nobody had any say in whether it would go on the NHS. However, ordinary people who don't spend their lives talking about politics would see that as the UK's NET spend being £350m and Gove and Boris being front line government minister's saying that money would be largely spent on the NHS. that was obviously the intention of the bus. As I say, I couldn't care less now but I do find people arguing that white is red on here really very wearing. Why is it so hard to admit that the leave campaign was being disingenuous? Looking back with hindsight I'd have to admit the same about some of Osborne's claims for remain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 1 hour ago, MattP said: No problem, glad to be of service, there is a huge difference between "is" and "could be" - it's not pedantic to point out the difference of that. If someone says to me "I'll deal with it" I assume that they are going to deal with whatever they are talking about, if someone says to me "let's deal with it" I would assume they are going to do their best to deal with something - I don't really see the hypocrisy in pointing this out but I've not really got time for this nonsense today. For the record I wouldn't hold Corbyn to his comments if he was in government either as again, it wasn't a manifesto commitment, I saw it for what it was, a cheap little line to grab a few more votes from the young and naive. Well of course I would, why wouldn't I? That's exactly what the SNP, Greens and the Liberal Democrats did just a few months ago. Matt I think you mean that you're not being pedantic, not "it's not pedantic". The "it's" in your sentence refers to the object in the first clause - implying that it's the "huge difference" that's not being pedantic. Whereas, in fact, what I think you're saying is that it's you who are not, in this one instance, being pedantic. The 'huge difference' is an abstract concept, incapable of pedantry. Can you please be clearer in future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 26 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said: Matt I think you mean that you're not being pedantic, not "it's not pedantic". The "it's" in your sentence refers to the object in the first clause - implying that it's the "huge difference" that's not being pedantic. Whereas, in fact, what I think you're saying is that it's you who are not, in this one instance, being pedantic. The 'huge difference' is an abstract concept, incapable of pedantry. Can you please be clearer in future. I think you mean, can you please be clearer in future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 2 minutes ago, Strokes said: I think you mean, can you please be clearer in future? I think you mean, in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 7 hours ago, Fox Ulike said: It does feel like I’m discussing it with myself now yes. There is a strong tendancy for pro-Brexit posters to just disappear as soon as their justifications have been answered and countered. They then pop up a couple of days later, arguing exactly the same things again. And you're different? Do you think that maybe we stop talking about it because we're bored of repeating the same old crap about a bus? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 Labour MP Kelvin Hopkins has been suspended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vacamion Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 I just read that he's 76. Seventy bloody six. If what he's alleged to have done wasn't so reprehensible, you would almost want to applaud him for effort at that age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 He is from Leicester i think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajthefox Posted 2 November 2017 Share Posted 2 November 2017 Foxes never quit... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buce Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 10 hours ago, Webbo said: Labour MP Kelvin Hopkins has been suspended. Fake news. Thatcher out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 1 hour ago, Buce said: Fake news. Thatcher out! Who was she in a lesbian relationship with? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 Can anyone shed any light on the Kelvin Hopkins suspension because it all seems very tame to me, i feel like i must be missing something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 13 minutes ago, Strokes said: Can anyone shed any light on the Kelvin Hopkins suspension because it all seems very tame to me, i feel like i must be missing something? I don't think we should speculate about the specifics on the forum for legal reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 2 minutes ago, Webbo said: I don't think we should speculate about the specifics on the forum for legal reasons. Does that mean there is things being reported on social media that hasnt made the press yet? I have no social media these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innovindil Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 14 minutes ago, Strokes said: Can anyone shed any light on the Kelvin Hopkins suspension because it all seems very tame to me, i feel like i must be missing something? Seems like a dirty old perv acting like a perv. Sounds a lot like one of my grandad's tbf, he used to enjoy a bit of bum pinching. I think it's being blown a bit out of proportion with all the other stuff flying around right now, it's definitely unacceptable today, but I'd argue most of these are men from a different time, and it's still pretty hard to teach an old dog new tricks. Not making excuses for them, just pointing out that their behaviour isn't so out of the norm for that age bracket, at least in my experiences. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 1 minute ago, Strokes said: Does that mean there is things being reported on social media that hasnt made the press yet? I have no social media these days. If its in the papers or TV you'd have to assume their lawyers have checked the story before publishing, also we're just quoting what's in the news. Social media is a bit iffy, I wouldn't want to risk it personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 30 minutes ago, Strokes said: Can anyone shed any light on the Kelvin Hopkins suspension because it all seems very tame to me, i feel like i must be missing something? Just allegations at the minute, could be quite serious though for procedure as according to the Times they knew about this stuff as far back as 2015. All depends what it is, if it's more knee touching I can't be arsed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Ulike Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 16 hours ago, Webbo said: And you're different? Do you think that maybe we stop talking about it because we're bored of repeating the same old crap about a bus? Well, in terms of Brexit, that’s my experience yes. I don’t think you’re bored of the bus. The reason you don’t want to talk about it is because you don’t have the answer. The Leave campaign and the Government enacting Brexit are withholding information from you, which makes it impossible to answer the question. IN the nicely possible way, and quite literally – you have no idea what you are talking about!! This is the answer that you should be able to give (figures are totally made up but you get the point): *** Yes, the bus was misleading and irresponsible. However, it doesn’t change the basic principle that the bus was trying to get across to people: That we will be a lot better off after Brexit. So OK, we don’t send £350m to Brussels, but we do send £200m net. When we leave the EU, we’ll have to spend the following to replace or replicate the services that the EU currently provides: £20m in the Home Office/Border Control £5m in the Foreign Office (additional embassies etc) £3m in Food Standards Agency £2m in Environmental protection… Etc etc etc… And in total this will come to £100m per week. If we end up on WTO tariffs it’s estimated that will cost business £50m per week. Plus certain industries will lose out because of the lack of cheap foreign workers to the tune of £10m So, we’ll still be £40m better off per week after Brexit. To me, that makes it worth doing. *** But you can’t say that because you don’t know. Instead, we have gone from a pre-referendum principle of “We will be massively better off after Brexit”; to “Well, we won’t be massively worse off after Brexit”. Yet, unquestioningly, you still support it. And you can’t even explain why, instead, you say you’re bored of the argument!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 11 minutes ago, Webbo said: If its in the papers or TV you'd have to assume their lawyers have checked the story before publishing, also we're just quoting what's in the news. Social media is a bit iffy, I wouldn't want to risk it personally. Fair enough, i am unlikely to quote social media because as ive said i dont use it. Apart from this. I was just wondering if there was more too it than being reported because although a bit inappropriate, its definitely tame from what i can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 3 November 2017 Share Posted 3 November 2017 40 minutes ago, Strokes said: Can anyone shed any light on the Kelvin Hopkins suspension because it all seems very tame to me, i feel like i must be missing something? Nope, the world had just gone mad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts