Advertisement
by Souseiseki » Mon Aug 24, 2020 12:24 pm
by The Huskar Social Union » Mon Aug 24, 2020 12:27 pm
Souseiseki wrote:play ode to joy lmao
by Souseiseki » Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:34 pm
by The New California Republic » Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:19 pm
Souseiseki wrote:[...] in an attempt to actually kill scottish independence dead for a generation could be the best move.
by Souseiseki » Mon Aug 24, 2020 2:38 pm
by The Blaatschapen » Mon Aug 24, 2020 3:11 pm
by Souseiseki » Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:33 am
by Vassenor » Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:37 am
Souseiseki wrote:dominic cummings father in law saying boris might resign within 6 months due to health concerns.
hell at this rate he might resign before brexit and coronavirus are even over.
what a shame that he will miss out on the fruits of his labour and his successor will wrongly have the smashing success of brexit and the UK's coronavirus policies attached to them.
very very sad.
by The Huskar Social Union » Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:53 am
by Hirota » Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:53 am
So, according to both the metro and the daily mail, Sir Humphry Wakefield is said to have told "a holidaymaker" who visited his castle that the Prime Minister is still suffering longer-term ill effects of coronavirus.Souseiseki wrote:dominic cummings father in law saying boris might resign within 6 months due to health concerns.
hell at this rate he might resign before brexit and coronavirus are even over.
what a shame that he will miss out on the fruits of his labour and his successor will wrongly have the smashing success of brexit and the UK's coronavirus policies attached to them.
very very sad.
by Philjia » Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:57 am
Souseiseki wrote:dominic cummings father in law saying boris might resign within 6 months due to health concerns.
hell at this rate he might resign before brexit and coronavirus are even over.
what a shame that he will miss out on the fruits of his labour and his successor will wrongly have the smashing success of brexit and the UK's coronavirus policies attached to them.
very very sad.
by Souseiseki » Tue Aug 25, 2020 4:59 am
Hirota wrote:So, according to both the metro and the daily mail, Sir Humphry Wakefield is said to have told "a holidaymaker" who visited his castle that the Prime Minister is still suffering longer-term ill effects of coronavirus.Souseiseki wrote:dominic cummings father in law saying boris might resign within 6 months due to health concerns.
hell at this rate he might resign before brexit and coronavirus are even over.
what a shame that he will miss out on the fruits of his labour and his successor will wrongly have the smashing success of brexit and the UK's coronavirus policies attached to them.
very very sad.
So the story here is the PM's advisor wife's dad said something about Bojo to someone random who then said it to someone in the business of making money through salacious headlines and site clicks.
Is that really the standard you two will accept at face value? Because I happen to know the heir of a totally legitimate fortune in Nigeria who should talk to you.
by Hirota » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:05 am
That's not an answer. I asked:Souseiseki wrote:Hirota wrote:So, according to both the metro and the daily mail, Sir Humphry Wakefield is said to have told "a holidaymaker" who visited his castle that the Prime Minister is still suffering longer-term ill effects of coronavirus.
So the story here is the PM's advisor wife's dad said something about Bojo to someone random who then said it to someone in the business of making money through salacious headlines and site clicks.
Is that really the standard you two will accept at face value? Because I happen to know the heir of a totally legitimate fortune in Nigeria who should talk to you.
yes. boris is a known liar and piece of shit who is about to get three way screwed so him running away under some excuse about health is entirely plausible.
Is that really the standard you two will accept at face value?
by Thanatttynia » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:14 am
Souseiseki wrote:thinking about what someone else said elsewhere, a scottish referendum in 2010 might have resulted in a more comfortable win but unionists blocked it. by delaying it they probably allowed scottish independence sentiment to swell as a result of the cameron government and allow the issue to be intertwined with brexit. both of these factors make the unionist majority less likely to hold and provide a reasonable sounding reason to hold another much sooner than would have otherwise come. it could very well be counted as a massive self-own to neatly compliments the unionists long history of self-owning.
this is interesting because it bears a resemblance to the current situation. with support for scottish independence slowly rising, support for independence being strongest in the younger generations and brexit/coronavirus building support for independence while a no deal brexit / second wave still looms on the horizon there is an argument that time is in fact on nicola sturgeon's side. so despite sturgeon's rallying for a second referendum and johnson's steadfast refusal to ever grant one it could be the case that granting a second referendum soon in an attempt to actually kill scottish independence dead for a generation could be the best move. in the past few days we've seen a few conservative MPs suggest that granting another referendum if the SNP win the next election may be the best option and we've seen michael gove talk about voting franchise for this referendum that is supposedly not going to happen until 2050.
so idk, i'm thinking, maybe they will actually do it and hope they can pull the 55% down before things get even worse in the long term. though the fact that no's lead seemed to be sliced near the end of the first referendum campaign and ended up significantly closer than anticipated must give them cold feet about this. obviously the best option would have been to see the 45% and treat it as a serious warning sign instead of declaring total victory forever and using that as an excuse to shove wheelbarrels of manure down scotland's throat under the mantra of "well you voted to stay so!" but that's apparently politically undesirable so lol.
by Souseiseki » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:15 am
Hirota wrote:That's not an answer. I asked:Souseiseki wrote:
yes. boris is a known liar and piece of shit who is about to get three way screwed so him running away under some excuse about health is entirely plausible.Is that really the standard you two will accept at face value?
It's not difficult, a yes or no should suffice.
by The Blaatschapen » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:25 am
Souseiseki wrote:
you've been given an answer. it is not my fault that the UK's various levels of corruption (petty nobles running everything through backdoor comms and gentleman's agreements vs lying media) have crossed streams.
by The New California Republic » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:27 am
The Blaatschapen wrote:Souseiseki wrote:
you've been given an answer. it is not my fault that the UK's various levels of corruption (petty nobles running everything through backdoor comms and gentleman's agreements vs lying media) have crossed streams.
Don't cross the streams, it will bring about a giant version of Gary Lineker.
by The Blaatschapen » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:31 am
by Souseiseki » Tue Aug 25, 2020 5:52 am
Thanatttynia wrote:Souseiseki wrote:thinking about what someone else said elsewhere, a scottish referendum in 2010 might have resulted in a more comfortable win but unionists blocked it. by delaying it they probably allowed scottish independence sentiment to swell as a result of the cameron government and allow the issue to be intertwined with brexit. both of these factors make the unionist majority less likely to hold and provide a reasonable sounding reason to hold another much sooner than would have otherwise come. it could very well be counted as a massive self-own to neatly compliments the unionists long history of self-owning.
this is interesting because it bears a resemblance to the current situation. with support for scottish independence slowly rising, support for independence being strongest in the younger generations and brexit/coronavirus building support for independence while a no deal brexit / second wave still looms on the horizon there is an argument that time is in fact on nicola sturgeon's side. so despite sturgeon's rallying for a second referendum and johnson's steadfast refusal to ever grant one it could be the case that granting a second referendum soon in an attempt to actually kill scottish independence dead for a generation could be the best move. in the past few days we've seen a few conservative MPs suggest that granting another referendum if the SNP win the next election may be the best option and we've seen michael gove talk about voting franchise for this referendum that is supposedly not going to happen until 2050.
so idk, i'm thinking, maybe they will actually do it and hope they can pull the 55% down before things get even worse in the long term. though the fact that no's lead seemed to be sliced near the end of the first referendum campaign and ended up significantly closer than anticipated must give them cold feet about this. obviously the best option would have been to see the 45% and treat it as a serious warning sign instead of declaring total victory forever and using that as an excuse to shove wheelbarrels of manure down scotland's throat under the mantra of "well you voted to stay so!" but that's apparently politically undesirable so lol.
Holding an existential referendum (irreversible if the outcome is 'yes' but apparently eminently repeatable if the answer is 'no') during two concurrent national political crises seems pretty stupid. People are very likely to translate any malaise they feel into support for Scottish independence - this happened in the EU referendum during a time of relative stability in the country. Agreeing to a referendum before Brexit is completed and the country at least partially recovers seems especially silly... beyond that, allowing a second 'once-in-a-generation' after a few years means, even if the answer is the same, the SNP will keep on asking like clockwork and at some point the answer is going to be 'yes' for whatever reason.
Secessionist movements always have the rhetorical upper-hand anyway, since they deal in 'the future' whilst unionists have to try to defend 'the present' and all accompanying baggage, cf. pro-independence is 'positive' and 'hopeful' and anti-independence is 'negative' and 'dull' etc. For Westminster to give away its best hand (our already having had a referendum with a negative result a very short time ago) would be supremely self-defeating (but then again in Westminster that might make it a more attractive option lol.)
by Hirota » Tue Aug 25, 2020 6:11 am
Sure. It is however, entirely your fault that you will find any piece of dubious speculation credible when it's convenient. Chinese whispers is anSouseiseki wrote:
you've been given an answer. it is not my fault that the UK's various levels of corruption (petty nobles running everything through backdoor comms and gentleman's agreements vs lying media) have crossed streams.
it's like the david cameron thing. whether or not he molested a dead pig is not the real story. the real story is that he is of such character that people are willing to believe he porked a pig without much encouragement.
by The New California Republic » Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:52 am
by Celritannia » Tue Aug 25, 2020 7:56 am
The New California Republic wrote:And the head of Ofqual has just resigned.
My DeviantArt Obey When you annoy a Celritannian U W0T M8?
| Citizen of Earth, Commonwealthian, European, British, Yorkshireman. Atheist, Environmentalist |
by The New California Republic » Tue Aug 25, 2020 8:19 am
by Souseiseki » Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:23 am
by The Huskar Social Union » Tue Aug 25, 2020 9:24 am
Souseiseki wrote:rule britannia probably should be dropped because 1) it is a meh song that is only good 25% of the time 2) britain no longer rules the waves and its people have allowed themselves to be reduced to slaves, so it is now inaccurate
jerusalem however is fine
Advertisement
Advertisement