What is the best flav... you all know what this question is: This poll is closed. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
Labour | 907 | 49.92% | |
Theresa May Team (Conservative) | 48 | 2.64% | |
Liberal Democrats | 31 | 1.71% | |
UKIP | 13 | 0.72% | |
Plaid Cymru | 25 | 1.38% | |
Green | 22 | 1.21% | |
Scottish Socialist Party | 12 | 0.66% | |
Scottish Conservative Party | 1 | 0.06% | |
Scottish National Party | 59 | 3.25% | |
Some Kind of Irish Unionist | 4 | 0.22% | |
Alliance / Irish Nonsectarian | 3 | 0.17% | |
Some Kind of Irish Nationalist | 36 | 1.98% | |
Misc. Far Left Trots | 35 | 1.93% | |
Misc. Far Right Fash | 8 | 0.44% | |
Monster Raving Loony | 49 | 2.70% | |
Space Navies Party | 39 | 2.15% | |
Independent / Single Issue | 2 | 0.11% | |
Can't Vote | 188 | 10.35% | |
Won't Vote | 8 | 0.44% | |
Spoiled Ballot | 15 | 0.83% | |
Pissflaps | 312 | 17.17% | |
Total: | 1817 votes |
|
OwlFancier posted:Might have some issues if you're a bit slow off the mark and the sea levels rise. Extremely tall wind turbines
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:04 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 14:49 |
|
happyhippy posted:Netherlands is mostly flat, so there must be some strong winds? this but the UK/denmark the uk is one of the best places for wind turbines in the world (and one of the only good spots where there's actual demand for the electricity produced) coffeetable fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Jun 30, 2017 |
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:10 |
|
coffeetable posted:the uk is one of the best places for wind turbines in the world God our weather is poo poo
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:12 |
|
How can this be? It's not That bad...
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:15 |
|
We have been over this a few times in this thread. You need nuclear, not because renewables are bad, but because the battery tech and network infrastructure isn't there to use them like baseload yet. Nuclear is required to get us over the hump and off carbon heavy fuel while the R&D and network investment takes place. It is also a reasonably good technology in its own right, and a totally valid thing to include in a low carbon energy mix - reliable, always on, safe, low carbon - what's not to like? The answer is actually uranium mining, but solar panels aren't made of water either.Guavanaut posted:You can make them out of saplings and water if you have a well managed system. Seriously? Please PM about this, genuinely tres interested. Zalakwe fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Jun 30, 2017 |
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:17 |
|
Zalakwe posted:but solar panels aren't made of water either. Everyone goes for the garbage unmanaged systems though.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:20 |
|
Zalakwe posted:what's not to like? no-one wants to loving build them
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:21 |
|
Mugsbaloney posted:How can this be? It's not That bad... Its not wind, its the Scots moaning all the time.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:21 |
|
good god, the military-industrial complex has spent most of a century trying to get civilian nuclear off the ground and got nowhere, just give up already and focus on poo poo that's actually palatable
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:23 |
|
loving nerds
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:23 |
|
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/30/wimbledon-warns-supporters-against-political-chants-slogans/
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:25 |
|
Anyone else hate the gently caress out of tennis at Wimbeldon? As a kid, two weeks of your summer had poo poo TV as there was nothing but loving tennis on it.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:27 |
|
communism bitch posted:Put big solar panels in orbit. Massive gigantic wafer thin sail designs, and then send the power back to earth in huge devastating beam of heat and light to be captured by some doohicky and just hope it never gets misaligned. I see you, too, are a cultured gentleman who played SimCity 2000. Also, that graph of solar power looks completely normal if you subscribe to Kurzweil's theories of technological advancement.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:31 |
|
Zalakwe posted:Seriously? Please PM about this, genuinely tres interested. What actually happened was that a lot of them went with cheap US biomass which was made by ruining old growth forests in the South.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:32 |
|
Jedit posted:No, it isn't. But people are getting motivated to participate in politics again, as evinced by last month's election, and when people get motivated like that it is always to oppose something they don't want. Every new vote in a second referendum would be for Remain. If this were actually true then Hillary would have won. It's more likely they came out to vote for something, like a manifesto pledges, a leader that spoke to them or sovreignty.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:33 |
|
Kokoro Wish posted:If this were actually true then Hillary would have won. It's more likely they came out to vote for something, like a manifesto pledges, a leader that spoke to them or sovreignty. Arguably that doesn't mean Jedit is wrong though; perhaps the new engagement he suggests is due to seeing what happens when you fanny around and let Trump win.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:35 |
|
happyhippy posted:Anyone else hate the gently caress out of tennis at Wimbeldon? That's basically all spectator sport when you aren't invested in the people playing
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:36 |
|
Guavanaut posted:Trees. There was supposed to be a massive thing where Scandinavia would move to managed forests capable of switching masses of coal power facilities to pelletized biomass, effectively making them carbon neutral solar power facilities, with the trees themselves as the energy storage. Trees are large solar chemical batteries that you can live in.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:38 |
|
Kokoro Wish posted:If this were actually true then Hillary would have won. It's more likely they came out to vote for something, like a manifesto pledges, a leader that spoke to them or sovreignty. The difficulty of comparing stuff to the US election is that under pretty much any other system Clinton would have been declared the clear winner
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:38 |
|
Gum posted:The difficulty of comparing stuff to the US election is that under pretty much any other system Clinton would have been declared the clear winner drat right. So, is anyone important going to face any real risk of prison as a result of the Grenfell Tower blaze?
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:40 |
|
Gum posted:The difficulty of comparing stuff to the US election is that under pretty much any other system Clinton would have been declared the clear winner Didn't Trump win both houses of the legislature too? So I mean even under some kind of a parliamentary democracy...
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:40 |
|
Gum posted:The difficulty of comparing stuff to the US election is that under pretty much any other system Clinton would have been declared the clear winner This isn't really knowable; Trump's strategy was shaped around how the election actually worked. Assuming instead it was an election with no electoral college it stands to reason that his strategy would have drastically changed.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:41 |
|
CoolCab posted:Didn't Trump win both houses of the legislature too? So I mean even under some kind of a parliamentary democracy... Dems got a majority of votes in the senate race too. The US system really sucks
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:45 |
|
Neurolimal posted:This isn't really knowable; Trump's strategy was shaped around how the election actually worked. Assuming instead it was an election with no electoral college it stands to reason that his strategy would have drastically changed. What strategy?
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:46 |
|
Gum posted:Dems got a majority of votes in the senate race too. The US system really sucks The House. The problem is the GOP got the House in 2010 and basically got to draw districts such that if there isn't a very powerful wave election against them they functionally cannot lose the lower house. We're talking an average national opinion swing of like 8-10% against them. Our system is loving awful
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:48 |
|
Targeting the states he needed to win with his message and campaign events.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:48 |
|
Gum posted:The difficulty of comparing stuff to the US election is that under pretty much any other system Clinton would have been declared the clear winner True, true. If I were being more accurate I would have said something along the lines of, although people voted for Macron more as a vote against Marine Le Penn, turnout for that election was vastly depressed as a result. Voting for something is always more appealing that voting against something.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:48 |
|
Night10194 posted:The House. The problem is the GOP got the House in 2010 and basically got to draw districts such that if there isn't a very powerful wave election against them they functionally cannot lose the lower house. We're talking an average national opinion swing of like 8-10% against them. Ironically the house race is the one they did get a majority of the vote in (Although it was close)
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:49 |
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Targeting the states he needed to win with his message and campaign events. His message and campaign events were all over the place. He didn't really seem to be targeting anywhere tbh
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:52 |
|
Oh and now they're making an 'election integrity commission' to decide which votes are legitimate. That's what I meant when I said your poo poo is less depressing because OUR Tories have put themselves in a position where they get to decide if you can even vote. The strategy with Trump was to keep him so busy with rallies that he wouldn't tweet and make national news again, because every time he did his polls dropped like a rock.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:52 |
|
Gum posted:His message and campaign events were all over the place. He didn't really seem to be targeting anywhere tbh He went to a lot of states that were considered democrat strongholds, ones that he ended up winning by hilariously slim margins.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:56 |
|
Gum posted:Dems got a majority of votes in the senate race too. The US system really sucks Right but that wouldn't matter in, say, the UK's system or any other FPTP system. And since the Senate is the upper house (as I understand) it wouldn't matter even then often because the lower house typically decides the executive in a parliamentary system (like in Canada) I'm pretty sure. Trump would have won in a tonne of different systems - and way more importantly, he won in yours. He got less votes, which is again, a little weird, but a straight popular vote is in no way a universal system for democracy- often the party which wins gets well less then 50% of the total vote. And your system of voting was put into place basically literally for this reason- less populous states joined the union expressly because the electoral college and senate were expressly designed to ensure they weren't overwhelmed by their richer and more populous neighbors. It's poo poo, but it's nowhere near as poo poo as voter suppression, which weirdly doesn't come up nearly as often when people are whining about the result they didn't like.
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:56 |
|
Who the gently caress are you calling a septic
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:57 |
|
Gum posted:Who the gently caress are you calling a septic is that new slang for "american" because if so, i'm on board 110%
|
# ? Jun 30, 2017 23:59 |
|
It's pretty old rhyming slang. New thread is up right here.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2017 00:02 |
|
What's interesting to me is seeing how your press tried really loving hard to kill Corbyn and it didn't work at all.
|
# ? Jul 1, 2017 00:02 |
|
CoolCab posted:is that new slang for "american" because if so, i'm on board 110% Septic=septic tank=yank. It's gotta date back to WW2 at least
|
# ? Jul 1, 2017 00:02 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 14:49 |
|
CoolCab posted:is that new slang for "american" because if so, i'm on board 110% It's cockney. Septic tank
|
# ? Jul 1, 2017 00:03 |