UKMT November 2019 - Andrew Can't Denounce Epstein Properly

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > UKMT November 2019 - Andrew Can't Denounce Epstein Properly

«‹›420 »

goddamnedtwisto: Dec 31, 2004; If you ask me about the mole people in the London Underground, I WILL be forced to kill you; Fun Shoe

radmonger posted:

making a detectably bad argument leaves you worse off than staying quiet.

First day on the internet is it?

e: Council house snipe:

Kelson Tower, a 28-storey early LPS building heavily influenced by Balfron Tower (although thanks to LPS it was actually completed first).

On completion and until 1988 it was the tallest building in Tower Hamlets. It is now not even in the top 50 tallest.

goddamnedtwisto fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Nov 18, 2019

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:28

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 27, 2024 15:39

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

radmonger posted:

Is this one of those things where �literally� means �the exact opposite of�?

He clearly sees the marriage as a good thing. Maybe that�s only because it creates an opportunities for him to cuckold the groom, but he hardly says that out loud.

I have never seen a sentence like "half-castes are the result of rampant miscegenation. This is the future of the human race." that wasn't written by someone with bizarre racial views that, although they may from time to time appear positive (in a really gross fetishistic way), are when you boil down to it racist.

Any comments on this one? Where he seems to simultaneously believe that

quote:

But we must hope, for the sake of candour and common sense, that he does not blame Britain, or colonialism, or the white man. The continent may be a blot, but it is not a blot upon our conscience. The problem is not that we were once in charge, but that we are not in charge any more.

and

quote:

And it is absurd, finally, to say that we have turned our backs on Africa. Donor countries provide 52 per cent of Uganda�s public spending, and Europeans and Americans supply a new imperial class of aidworkers, vigorous and exuberantly politically correct.

and also

quote:

We may treat them like children, but it�s not because of us that they behave like the children in Lord of the Flies.

Because I can't think of any way to read that in combination which doesn't blame the state of Africa on the 'inherent primal and savage nature' of the African.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:31

Tesseraction: Apr 5, 2009

It's very anti-Semitic of you to call Boris Johnson a racist

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:32

Braggart: Nov 10, 2011; always thank the rock hider

ro5s posted:

What Tory voter is being put off by racism?!

People who see the Tories as the sensible economics and traditions party. It's a perception that the party has ridden for a long time as it has descended further into turbocapitalism. It's complete bollocks, but it's widely-repeated bollocks. The stuff about attributing things that happened in the 70s under the Conservatives to Labour is part of maintaining that reputation. There are a lot of Tory voters who absolutely can't stand Boris Johnson. The more horrible poo poo they hear about him and other Tories, the less likely they are to actually go out and vote. People mostly don't jump directly from voting Tory to Labour or vice versa - one of the most powerful strategies for winning elections is to encourage your voters to turn out and discourage opposing voters. That's why the establishment is trying its hardest to make potential Labour voters feel hopeless

Basically the Tory Party is a big tent, but they're abandoning all of their supporters apart from the racist clowns. Everyone else who usually votes Tory is having a crisis of conscience because the bigotry and corruption are becoming more and more explicit :getin:

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:38

Gonzo McFee: Jun 19, 2010

drat if only there was some long history of him very openly using racial terms dismissively and perhaps even editing a magazine that published an actual loving Nazi.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:40

ronya: Nov 8, 2010; I'm the normal one.

You hate ridden fucks will regret your words when you eventually grow up.

Peace.

I'm perhaps too skeptical of twitter - on the internet everyone is a sockpuppet - but the easy answer there is that the screenshot is a fake

Ratjaculation posted:

Hello thread!

A few days ago I asked for some more info in regards to a friend (born in 1990) saying that Corbyn would to take us back to the 1970s, a typical gammon outcry sadly. I've been reading up on the 70s to try and understand it and this is what I've got;

Early in the decade during the Heath Tory government, we were having coal power issues as we were still heavily reliant on coal for energy back then, and unfortunately supply was failing to meet demand.

Nationalised Miners were being forced to work longer hours, in more dangerous conditions to increase supply, in a system that had reduced resources stemming from the Tories.

There were blackouts regularly as the supply/demand line was crossed.

Heath brought in the three day working week as a way to reduce the demand, basically meaning commercial properties would only be allocated energy for 3 days of a working week. Obviously, the economy suffered massively from this and employment began to rise sharply.

The Miners went on strike ✊✊✊ due to pay demands not being met, and concerns about their wellbeing under the increased workload and more dangerous mining. Heath said no.

In 1974 there were two elections, the first resulting in the minority Wilson Labour government (Libs were still moaning fucks back then), they immediately increased Miners pay and improved conditions, the strikes wound down. The second election won Labour a slim majority.

The weak Labour govenrment made some strides, like the 1975 referendum on joining the European common market, Labour had no official position but most of the cabinet supported joining it. The economy stabilised somewhat, but Labour largely failed to reduce unemployment, instead it floated around 5-6%.

The 1979 election aka The Witch Rises was won by the Tories, largely attacking Labour on their failures to control unemployment. Thatcher almost immediately destroyed most of the nationalised basic utilities, plunging the country into a spiral.and resulting in unemployment doubling.

But everyone instantly forgot how poo poo the Tories were when are boys went to war.

------

My understanding could be completely wrong so feel free to point out any mistakes

But to me the argument that Corbyn wants to take us back to the 70's is obviously the usual bullshit. Comparing a business wide forced 3-day-working week, to a 4-day staff working week is shite, especially when the latter shows increased overall productivity.

Comparing blackouts to green energy? Fart noise.

tl;dr tories are unts

Across the 1960s, pits were being closed, not opened. Demand for coal was falling rapidly. The industry had been gradually being hammered by the invasion of cheap oil, and the NCB was steadily closing pits; opposing these closures was a key demand for the NUM. The 1950 Plan for Coal had overestimated coal demand dramatically and there was a considerable surplus built up.

The main thing that was eating into miner's conditions was inflation eroding real wages. Inflation was higher than the pay increases.

The big clash was in 1972, not in 1974. That clash was underpinned by a tactical evolution more than anything else - the NUM realized that it could picket the movement of coal from stockpiles to power stations. Even though the NCB initially had sufficient surplus coal in stock, it could not transport it to the CEGB's power stations successfully. This was a relatively novel tactic to public opinion and policing strategies. The government at the time was not willing to force the passage of lorries; many stations were in populated areas (the Saltley Gate protest ~~in which a picketing miner was run over by a lorry~~ was in the middle of Birmingham, not out in the coal region somewhere) and the wider sense of legitimacy of riot police as a concept and crowd control as a public interest had not yet set in (compare Orgreave more than a decade later, or Ridley's pre-emptive movement of coal to power stations when industrial action was anticipated).

This limitation was what drove the three-day week, which was a more of a stunt than a serious constraint upon electricity generation; it was gambit intended to impress upon the British public that the crisis was being driven by the miners (Tony Benn denounced it as a "calculated deception" intended to turn the public against the miners. Which it was! He wasn't wrong on that point - household electricity was just not a sufficiently big consumer of power. The main reason to impact households and non-industrial offices was to force the costs to be widely felt). The miners called the bluff and held out until February. Heath relented and agreed to the NUM's wage demands.

This appearance of weakness did not help the Conservatives or for that matter Labour - the Liberals made large gains in 1973 in local and by-elections, somewhat mitigating their 1970 losses (from 12 to 6 and back to 11 by end 1973).

Several other things happened in 1973. The stock market crashed in early 1973 - the FTSE went down by 70% - and growth stalled. After growth in 1972, despite record industrial action, stagflation was setting in. Mick McGahey succeeded Joe Gormley as leader of the NUM; McGahey was much more leftist and much more political, and pledged to bring in a Labour government. The NUM NEC balloted members to strike again in 1973 and was defeated in a landslide. And a coalition of Arab nations invaded Israel on Yom Kippur, sparking off many interesting events such as e.g. a fivefold increase in oil prices. The UK began distributing coupons for petrol rationing and reduced the speed limit to 50mph.

At the end of 1973 - before any strike action had even taken place - Heath re-declared a state of emergency and the three-day week. This was not unreasonable; surveys suggested that if the NUM reballoted members on this year's wage demand, it would succeed. In January 1974, it did and won as expected. Strikes started on 5th February but were largely symbolic - in contrast to Gormley's strategy, McGahey pursued a strategy of studiously avoiding violence which was thought to be unpopular in the wake of 1972 and would certainly not be welcome in time of perceived national instability and cabinet ministers on television solemnly asking the people of Britain to brush their teeth in the dark. Pickets were limited to six men per picket line and no more.

Nonetheless, Heath went ahead with the election two days later. His administration was already four years old, the 1973 recession was unlikely to improve much before the five-year mark, and Labour's internal struggle at the time could not last forever (the left was at this time in its ascendancy, in particular Tony Benn - it had not yet ousted the center-right, who continued to dominate Wilson's cabinet). Memos from his private secretary Douglas Hurd nonetheless emphasized the need to find a good reason for an early election and highlighted the thread that the 1972-style narrative could play in early 1974. An electoral confrontation could undo the perceived surrender to union demands in 1972, which polling suggested that a majority of the public disapproved in retrospect.

Heath ran on "Who governs Britain?", as expected.

Unexpectedly, Labour won a plurality of seats. The Conservatives still had the most votes but too many were wasted. Several points of note:

- the 1970 election had wrongfooted many pollsters - many had forecasted a Labour majority. Many adjusted their approaches in response and had now forecasted a Conservative majority.
- the Sunningdale agreement had infuriated unionists, who would go on to support Wilson's government
- Enoch Powell (!) endorsed Labour in furious to opposition to the UK's membership of the European Community. Powell was at the peak of his post-sacking notoriety and influence at that point
- a report was leaked from the Pay Board suggesting that Heath's government had limited the NCB to making offers below what was recommended by the Pay Board. This was not a quite a fair interpretation (rather the Pay Board was evolving the basis upon which it was making recommendations and the government disagreed). Nonetheless it undermined the entire supposed rationale of the election, i.e., the supposedly unreasonable demands of miners. Instead it looked as if Heath had put the country through a cold winter as an electoral stunt. In the meanwhile, the miners were being conspicuously non-violent.
- since you mention it... the Liberals gained massively to 20% of the popular vote.

In general 'the 1970s' refers more to the perceived malaise afflicting Callaghan's government, not Heath or Wilson's brief second admin - the 1976 IMF bailout and austerity, being picked off by by-elections and hence having to agree to the Lib-Lab pact, going back on it, and then enduring the political instability of minority government, the strikes in 1978/1979, etc. You don't need to feel obliged to defend Callaghan - for a long time the left regarded Callaghan with a degree of fervor akin to how it might regard Blair today.

ronya fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Nov 18, 2019

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:47

Chuka Umana: Apr 30, 2019; by sebmojo

Happy 32nd anniversary of the King's Cross fire.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:48

NinpoEspiritoSanto: Oct 22, 2013

https://twitter.com/MichaelH14/status/1196431553993355264

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:53

Braggart: Nov 10, 2011; always thank the rock hider

Bundy posted:

https://twitter.com/MichaelH14/status/1196431553993355264

Labour can't beat the Tories in any seat! Only the Lib Dems can win here, there and everywhere!!! :byodame:

# ? Nov 18, 2019 18:58

Gonzo McFee: Jun 19, 2010

Man declared fit for work and then died in a job centre waiting for JSA.

https://twitter.com/REWearmouth/status/1196485676591697921

65 years old.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:00

radmonger: Jun 6, 2011

Guavanaut posted:

Because I can't think of any way to read that in combination which doesn't blame the state of Africa on the 'inherent primal and savage nature' of the African.

You appear to be arguing with someone who thinks is Boris Johnson is not racist, rather that someone who thinks he once managed to say something for which the worst thing you can accurately say about it is that it is wrong about carrot genetics.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:04

Trickjaw: Jun 23, 2005; Nadie puede dar lo que no tiene

radmonger posted:

You appear to be arguing with someone who thinks is Boris Johnson is not racist, rather that someone who thinks he once managed to say something for which the worst thing you can accurately say about it is that it is wrong about carrot genetics.

I'd quit now, pal.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:05

Tesseraction: Apr 5, 2009

radmonger posted:

You appear to be arguing with someone who thinks is Boris Johnson is not racist, rather that someone who thinks he once managed to say something for which the worst thing you can accurately say about it is that it is wrong about carrot genetics.

"Look, I know he was walking around with calipres and making insane nonsensical statements, but maybe he's just eccentric, and not a phrenologist"

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:08

NinpoEspiritoSanto: Oct 22, 2013

radmonger posted:

You appear to be arguing with someone who thinks is Boris Johnson is not racist, rather that someone who thinks he once managed to say something for which the worst thing you can accurately say about it is that it is wrong about carrot genetics.

Doubling down on this is certainly an interesting tactic that I did not expect.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:08

Scikar: Nov 20, 2005; 5? Seriously?

ronya posted:

The government at the time was not willing to force the passage of lorries; many stations were in populated areas (the Saltley Gate protest, in which a picketing miner was run over by a lorry, is in the middle of Birmingham, not out in the coal region somewhere)

I feel bad for doing this in response to a genuinely interesting and informative post, and I think your point still stands, but in wanting to read more about this I went to Wikipedia which claims that Fred Matthews was actually killed outside Keadby Power Plant near Scunthorpe.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:11

ronya: Nov 8, 2010; I'm the normal one.

You hate ridden fucks will regret your words when you eventually grow up.

Peace.

Scikar posted:

I feel bad for doing this in response to a genuinely interesting and informative post, and I think your point still stands, but in wanting to read more about this I went to Wikipedia which claims that Fred Matthews was actually killed outside Keadby Power Plant near Scunthorpe.

You are right... the ignited brawl was at Saltley Gate but the trigger of Fred Matthew's death was somewhere else, I have confused them together

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:16

feedmegin: Jul 30, 2008

radmonger posted:

making a detectably bad argument leaves you worse off than staying quiet.

And yet you keep posting

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:21

Pilchenstein: May 17, 2012; So your plan is for half of us to die?; Hot Rope Guy

radmonger posted:

You appear to be arguing with someone who thinks is Boris Johnson is not racist, rather that someone who thinks he once managed to say something for which the worst thing you can accurately say about it is that it is wrong about carrot genetics.

You're a colossal loving twat, just shut the gently caress up while you're behind for once.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:25

NinpoEspiritoSanto: Oct 22, 2013

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:29

Wiggly Wayne DDS: Sep 11, 2010

so the latest bmg poll (11-18) that everyone's been touting about an 8pt lead to the tories? let's go into the BMG's own figures with 0 changes and see where that comes from

Fieldwork dates: 12th - 15th Novemeber 2019
Sample: 1506 GB adults aged 18+
Data Collection Method: Fieldwork was conducted online. Invitations to participate were sent to members of online panels. Non-response from different demographic groups was taken into account during the fieldwork phase and post-fieldwork adjustments.

# of samples on age group and the initial weights (this is useful to see if they're oversampling demos or asking 2 18-24s who happen to be tories and scaling it to 200 for that demo, etc)

code:

Column %	Total	18 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 54	55 to 64	65+
Unweighted Base	1414	158		229		227		259		209		332
Weighted Base	1340	154		210		214		232		202		328

so a fairly reasonable starting point, over 65s will be far more accurate than 18 to 24 based off of who they could get in contact with but they're in roughly the same ballpark outside of that

first off is their usual question selection:

1 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for?
2 And which of the following parties are you leaning towards most?

then they do some weightings:
3 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze)
4 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze and VALID)

but then this section appears which is new

5 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze) by INDY
6 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze and VALID) by INDY

now spoilers on comparing 3 & 5 and 4 & 6 remember this was the headliner 8pt lead...

3 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze)
Con 32%
Lab 28%
Lib 15%

5 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze) by INDY
Con 33%
Lab 27%
Lib 15%

And the valid weights?

4 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze and VALID)
Con 35%
Lab 31%
Lib 16%

6 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze and VALID) by INDY
Con 37%
Lab 29%
Lib 16%

and let's do a comparison on the unweighted/weighted base to see how they're adjusting it on their sides...

code:

1 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? 
18 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 54	55 to 64	65+
97.55%		91.60%		94.33%		89.53%		96.63%		98.72%

3 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze)
18 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 54	55 to 64	65+
97.55%		91.60%		94.33%		89.53%		96.63%		98.72%

5 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze) by INDY
18 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 54	55 to 64	65+
78.18%		72.77%		94.44%		94.75%		106.03%		110.97%

4 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze and VALID)
18 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 54	55 to 64	65+
94.33%		88.80%		90.90%		90.45%		94.12%		98.77%

6 If a General Election were held today, which of the following parties would you vote for? (inc. Squeeze and VALID) by INDY
18 to 24	25 to 34	35 to 44	45 to 54	55 to 64	65+
75.66%		71.06%		91.32%		96.27%		103.27%		111.00%

always read the fineprint and boy is it strange that the indy had their own unique weights that shifted the results that much...

and a noteworthy part of their methodology sheet:

quote:

Electoral Registration Adjustment: Factors have been applied to the Westminster Vote figures using to account rates of electoral registration among key groups. Factors were derived from a survey question that asked respondents whether or not they are registered to vote. The results were then segmented by age and tenure (two variables that were identified by the Electoral Commission report �Accuracy & Completeness of Electoral Registers 2016� as key discriminators of registration completeness).

Readers should note that, since the electoral registration deadline for the upcoming General Election is not until the 26th of November 2019, it is possible that the profile of the eligible to vote population will change in the coming weeks as more people register to vote. Our electoral registration factors have been designed to be dynamic up to this point, adjusting to reflect reported levels of registration as ascertained by our polling, before they are eventually finalised once the deadline has passed.

so expect a sudden surprise spike after the 26th where the first-reg surge happens (which significantly leans in one demographic's direction...)

now let's look at survation who had this headline going: https://www.survation.com/survation-on-behalf-of-good-morning-britain-general-election-tracker-poll-week-1/

quote:

Sample size: 1010
Fieldwork dates: 14th-16th November 2019
Methodology: People aged 18+ living in the UK were interviewed by telephone using a mix of mobile and landline numbers

Conservative: 42%
Labour: 28%
Liberal Democrat: 13%
The Brexit Party: 5%
Green: 3%
Another party (inc Plaid Cymru and SNP): 9%

14pt lead! that's remarkable, let's look into their raw data and see what we can interpret

Q2. Now thinking about your own constituency and the candidates likely to stand, if the General Election were tomorrow, which party would you vote for?

code:

			Total	18-24	25-34	35-44	45-54	55-64	65-74	75+
Unweighted Total	1010	67	85	113	233	246	159	107
Weighted Total		1010	112	168	163	181	152	143	91
				167.02%	198.01%	143.91%	77.54%	61.82%	90.17%	85.10%

now a glance at survation in comparison to BMG should raise some eyebrows

code:

18-24	25-34	35-44	45-54	55-64	65-74	75+
167.02%	198.01%	143.91%	77.54%	61.82%	90.17%	85.10%	Survation (who include 75+ as a distinct category)
97.55%	91.60%	94.33%	89.53%	96.63%	98.72%		BMG

yeah survation are dramatically undersampling the under 45s, and 45-54 has been the tipping point on lab/con on the other surveys. although oddly the tipping point is 35-44 in this - very strange demo they're targeting

now i'd dig into their weightings in detail now but on further look it just pronounces the original margin of errors, so a quick runthrough:
Q2. Now thinking about your own constituency and the candidates likely to stand, if the General Election were tomorrow, which party would you vote for?
Q2. Normal weightings
Con: 32.1%
Lab: 21.5%
Lib: 9.9%
Undecided: 18.8%
lab/con ratio: 66.9%

Q2. Normal weightings & likelihood to vote
Con: 33.1%
Lab: 21.9%
Lib: 10.4%
Undecided: 16.9%
lab/con ratio: 66.1%

Q2. Normal weightings & likelihood to vote, with undecided and refused removed
Con: 42.1%
Lab: 27.8%
Lib: 13.2%
lab/con ratio: 66.0%

so it's the same ratio as the original weightings but exaggerated by adding in more cutoffs to make the gap look bigger
enough :words:

for now anyway

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:30

NinpoEspiritoSanto: Oct 22, 2013

This one's better:

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:35

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

Bundy posted:

This one's better:

Neolibs Without Aptitude

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:37

Jedit: Dec 10, 2011; Proudly supporting vanilla legends 1994-2014

Guavanaut posted:

Neolibs Without Aptitude

Straight Outta Commons.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:40

Chuka Umana: Apr 30, 2019; by sebmojo

Wiggly Wayne DDS posted:

words

Just tell me if the polls are closer than reported!!

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:41

Alan G: Dec 27, 2003

Bundy posted:

No Welfare Allowed

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:41

Bobby Deluxe: May 9, 2004

Tesseraction posted:

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhh the R/L convergence doesn't work this way you racist loving oval office.

I mean as far as I was aware, it doesn't happen in China. It happens in Japan because they don't have R or L as consonants, they have a consonant sound which is halfway between the tongue position for R and L, so they are not familiar with the difference between the two.*

Ascribing this Japanese speech feature to a Chinese woman is astoundingly racist on the level of 'they all look the same to me. And as my wife just pointed out, rugs are oriental, people aren't.

If you're not sure, the correct way of handling it is to say Asian, or specifically East Asian if you're trying to distinguish from India / Pakistan / Kashmir asians (West Asians). Even then, you don't loving fetishise their race or imply they were only employed as eye candy for first class passengers.

* This is why Kojima's naming of the La Le Lu Li Lo is a great bilingual joke that nobody ever gets.

Ratjaculation posted:

no its the bins

# ? Nov 18, 2019 19:43

Mr Phillby: Apr 8, 2009; ~TRAVIS~

Having a court order that you're not important enough to be in an ITV TV debate is just the most Jo Swinson thing.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:01

Braggart: Nov 10, 2011; always thank the rock hider

Mr Phillby posted:

Having a court order that you're not important enough to be in an ITV TV debate is just the most Jo Swinson thing.

That court is misogynist! They blocked Nicola Sturgeon as well! Not that she should be in the debate, but I should!

I was a little hesitant to post this because I'm well aware that bad-faith mockery of feminism is a widespread thing, so I want to clarify that that definitely wasn't my intention. I wrote this specifically because Jo Swinson called the initial decision not to include her in the debate misogynistic. She was the one using the argument in bad faith, because she does everything in bad faith. Personally, I think feminism is awesome and extremely important for the pursuit of a better, more equal society for all. Chuds should shut the gently caress up with their lazy, tired jokes strawmanning feminism in pathetically predictable ways. And also a huge 'gently caress you' to them for making me feel I have to write this disclaimer that is much longer than the original joke. Bigots ruin everything.

I hope this was okay

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:20

Pesky Splinter: Feb 16, 2011; A worried pug.

Mr Phillby posted:

Having a court order that you're not important enough to be in an ITV TV debate is just the most Jo Swinson thing.

"I want to speak to the Judge manager!" < :mad:

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:22

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

It was pretty lolworthy for her to say "It's misogynistic to exclude the woman leading the third largest party from the debate. No, not her."

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:23

NinpoEspiritoSanto: Oct 22, 2013

e: ^^ yeah this is it entirely lmao

BTW Guavanaut you've prompted some proper lols out of me lately, appreciate your posting brand

Braggart posted:

That court is misogynist! They blocked Nicola Sturgeon as well! Not that she should be in the debate, but I should!

I was a little hesitant to post this because I'm well aware that bad-faith mockery of feminism is a widespread thing, so I want to clarify that that definitely wasn't my intention. I wrote this specifically because Jo Swinson called the initial decision not to include her in the debate misogynistic. She was the one using the argument in bad faith, because she does everything in bad faith. Personally, I think feminism is awesome and extremely important for the pursuit of a better, more equal society for all. Chuds should shut the gently caress up with their lazy, tired jokes strawmanning feminism in pathetically predictable ways. And also a huge 'gently caress you' to them for making me feel I have to write this disclaimer that is much longer than the original joke. Bigots ruin everything.

I hope this was okay

Relax comrade we all know Swinson is a shite that yelled misogyny over the debate when it had nothing to do with it. So long as you put some thought into what you say when dealing with such subject matter, just post. As someone that's been guilty of galactic takes in the past, most folks here are good at correcting without slinging you into a vat of oil.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:25

Tijuana Bibliophile: Dec 30, 2008; Scratchmo

clearly this election is the opportunity to re�valuate boris johnson's good opinion haver status

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:28

Braggart: Nov 10, 2011; always thank the rock hider

Bundy posted:

Relax comrade we all know Swinson is a shite that yelled misogyny over the debate when it had nothing to do with it. So long as you put some thought into what you say when dealing with such subject matter, just post. As someone that's been guilty of galactic takes in the past, most folks here are good at correcting without slinging you into a vat of oil.

Cheers, but I think it was worth posting the disclaimer regardless of whether anyone would've tried to call out the joke. Anti-feminist 'comedy' is so widespread and is just assumed to be the default, that I think the responsible thing is to speak out against it when I write something that could be interpreted that way otherwise

All of my favourite childhood shows that lasted for a long time seem to have at least one LOL feminism episode written by chuds. It's feckin irritating

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:35

Azza Bamboo: Apr 7, 2018; THUNDERDOME LOSER 2021

Swinson isn't even the creator of this nonsense. Harman has been trying to make centrist melting a feminist issue since 2015, along with Kendall and joined by jessflips.

I hope Corbyn is succeeded by someone like Rayner just to crush this pathetic idea.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:37

RockyB: Mar 8, 2007; Dog Therapy: Shockingly Good

https://twitter.com/jimwaterson/status/1196466474019364865

Lmao. "those charts are misleading in a sense of reinforcing the view that media somewhat controls how people think about parties. At best they reflect and reinforce existing views."

E: Obligatory Satanic Summoning Ritual

RockyB fucked around with this message at 20:52 on Nov 18, 2019

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:39

Ague Proof: Jun 5, 2014; they told me
I was everything

Lib Dems winning here.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:45

Strom Cuzewon: Jul 1, 2010

Thanks to whoever recommended The Constant. I'm feeling low and lazy today, and it's a great comfort. Cheery, interesting, varied, it's great. Favourite so far is the terrifying mystery of the epidemic of Windshield Pitting in 1950s seattle.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:50

kustomkarkommando: Oct 22, 2012

I don't really give a gently caress about Swinson but if we're gonna commit to leaders debates as a fixture of election TV we should ape the Canadians with an independent commission with clear established qualifier conditions for participants as the current haphazard system seems prone to some rather aribitrary rules no one can quite explain.

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:52

Azza Bamboo: Apr 7, 2018; THUNDERDOME LOSER 2021

The ITV debate is for the two main parties, which is a legitimate decision in our FPTP system

# ? Nov 18, 2019 20:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 27, 2024 15:39

Guavanaut: Nov 27, 2009; Looking At Them Tittys
1969 - 1998; Toilet Rascal

Braggart posted:

Cheers, but I think it was worth posting the disclaimer regardless of whether anyone would've tried to call out the joke. Anti-feminist 'comedy' is so widespread and is just assumed to be the default, that I think the responsible thing is to speak out against it when I write something that could be interpreted that way otherwise

All of my favourite childhood shows that lasted for a long time seem to have at least one LOL feminism episode written by chuds. It's feckin irritating

And the more 'adult' shows always had a "ha ha it's a man in a dress I bet he's a gay" 'joke'. Often with the defence that "well at least we're talking about it." Sure, in the same way that Roy Chubby Brown isn't afraid to talk about race.

Azza Bamboo posted:

Swinson isn't even the creator of this nonsense. Harman has been trying to make centrist melting a feminist issue since 2015, along with Kendall and joined by jessflips.

I hope Corbyn is succeeded by someone like Rayner just to crush this pathetic idea.

I'm a fan of RLB but both seem good.

And the people trying are textbook examples of White Feminism (it's bad) when Diane Abbott is Shadow Home Secretary.

(This is zero part of my preferring RLB over Rayner, because I didn't even know it until today, but "Rayner left secondary school aged 16 whilst pregnant and without any recognised qualifications." is going to lead to some loving charming lines of attack in the press, I can feel it. In fact it might be a point in her favor, because people with lived experience of that don't get enough representation in Parliament, and she's done good work in the Education post. She might do better work continuing in Education or Families and Children and have a leftier leader.)

Bundy posted:

BTW Guavanaut you've prompted some proper lols out of me lately, appreciate your posting brand

Thanks

# ? Nov 18, 2019 21:04

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > UKMT November 2019 - Andrew Can't Denounce Epstein Properly

«‹›420 »