NationStates

Celritannia wrote:She is a vile woman.

it's legit hard to tell whether priti is a legit horrible person or just a pathetic patsy who goes along with whatever the party tells her (we know in this government people are promoted based on loyalty and meekishness not skill or conviction) and got dumped into the mr. nasty office and now feels she needs to be a raving authoritarian minority slapping dickhead to play the part

e: that's not a political nickname but a commentary on how home secretaries are required to adopt a certain public persona as part of their role but i'm not going to spend an excessive amount of time getting into it unless i have to

Souseiseki wrote:

Celritannia wrote:She is a vile woman.

it's legit hard to tell whether priti is a legit horrible person or just a pathetic patsy who goes along with whatever the party tells her (we know in this government people are promoted based on loyalty and meekishness not skill or conviction) and got dumped into the mr. nasty office and now feels she needs to be a raving authoritarian dickhead to play the part

Before getting into politics she was a lobbyist for the tobacco industry.

Souseiseki wrote:

Celritannia wrote:She is a vile woman.

it's legit hard to tell whether priti is a legit horrible person or just a pathetic patsy who goes along with whatever the party tells her (we know in this government people are promoted based on loyalty and meekishness not skill or conviction) and got dumped into the mr. nasty office and now feels she needs to be a raving authoritarian dickhead to play the part

I suspect she is an unpleasant person and overcompensating to fit in.

Fartsniffage wrote:

Souseiseki wrote:
it's legit hard to tell whether priti is a legit horrible person or just a pathetic patsy who goes along with whatever the party tells her (we know in this government people are promoted based on loyalty and meekishness not skill or conviction) and got dumped into the mr. nasty office and now feels she needs to be a raving authoritarian dickhead to play the part

Before getting into politics she was a lobbyist for the tobacco industry.

Is that a bad thing though?

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Fartsniffage wrote:
Before getting into politics she was a lobbyist for the tobacco industry.

Is that a bad thing though?

yes

Looks like the Lib Dem leadership race is down to Ed Davey and Layla Moran, unless someone else enters the race.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53170159

Still hoping they won't be foolish enough to vote her leader.

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Looks like the Lib Dem leadership race is down to Ed Davey and Layla Moran, unless someone else enters the race.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53170159

Still hoping they won't be foolish enough to vote her leader.

They're having a leadership race? Btw, who are the "Lib Dems"?

Celritannia wrote:

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:Looks like the Lib Dem leadership race is down to Ed Davey and Layla Moran, unless someone else enters the race.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53170159

Still hoping they won't be foolish enough to vote her leader.

They're having a leadership race? Btw, who are the "Lib Dems"?

Is that humour?

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
They're having a leadership race? Btw, who are the "Lib Dems"?

Is that humour?

Are they a party of some sort?

Of course its humour.

Celritannia wrote:

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:
Is that humour?

Are they a party of some sort?

Of course its humour.

I believe they're a form of skin condition. Sounds very nasty.

please stop bullying the fourth largest party in the UK

Souseiseki wrote:please stop bullying the fourth largest party in the UK

Liberal-Democratism is a perfectly legitimate ideology.
That's why they have been on a consistent downwards trend into irrelevance ever since they were founded, save for a brief glorious period where the Labour party was also run by a Liberal who did the thumb-pointing thing and the Liberals were run by a charming drunk, and thus they had relevance again. That man now being the primary impetus for "We need to change the Labour party, that was utter horseshit, my god, what a shit ideology.".

We shouldn't bully the Liberals. They're perfectly legitimate.

Absolutely.


Do you remember when they were in government last time and how they achieved major changes to the direction of the country?
Certainly nothing like UKIP, who could never achieve such systemic reforms.


They're a relevant political party with relevant ideas and an alternative vision for the UK.

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:

Celritannia wrote:
Are they a party of some sort?

Of course its humour.

I believe they're a form of skin condition. Sounds very nasty.

I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

The Archregimancy wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:I believe they're a form of skin condition. Sounds very nasty.

I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

Plus, if Moran is elected, She has a better chance of having the party to retake the seat in Scotland they lost. The Lib Dems are really the only unionist political party of the UK to gain victories in Scotland.

The Archregimancy wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:I believe they're a form of skin condition. Sounds very nasty.

I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

So you're saying Donald Trump is a Lib Dem sufferer? Sounds dodgy but okay...

The Archregimancy wrote:

Greater vakolicci haven wrote:I believe they're a form of skin condition. Sounds very nasty.

I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

I keep hearing about this boyfriend slapping incident. What happened there?

Andsed wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

I keep hearing about this boyfriend slapping incident. What happened there?

She had an argument with her boyfriend over an extension lead and slapped him.

The careometer for MRAs and people concerned with it hit about a 2/10 given our understanding that an isolated act of violence isn't abuse. Mostly focused on commentary on how the media treated it differently and discussions on relationship stress and so on.

But then she had to go and try and justify it and make out he had it coming, and Jess Phillips and all the other people who shouldn't have a job went to bat for her, and the careometer went to 10/10, never voting for her, you've got enemies now mate.

I don't want some delusional misandrist running the country running her mouth off about how emotionally volatile women are justified in hitting their partners.

I'd also suggest you might hit something akin to BLM there, though feminists are likely to flip out over the comparison.

Nominate someone in the modern era who openly shills for police brutality against black people and you'll get riots and violence.

Nominate Layla Moran, and Lib Dem campaigners are going to be inundated with harassment and threats in a digital riot, and that reaction will be about as justified as if you nominated an open racist.

Andsed wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

I keep hearing about this boyfriend slapping incident. What happened there?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-47686844

You'll find a range of perspectives over the issue between those who would argue this is an unforgiveable assault that exemplifies gender-based double standards in Western politics to those who would argue that it was a one-off incident that shouldn't have any longer-term impact on her political career now that she's apologised and the parties involved have all moved on, with various shades of opinion in between.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

Souseiseki wrote:please stop bullying the fourth largest party in the UK

Liberal-Democratism is a perfectly legitimate ideology.
That's why they have been on a consistent downwards trend into irrelevance ever since they were founded, save for a brief glorious period where the Labour party was also run by a Liberal who did the thumb-pointing thing and the Liberals were run by a charming drunk, and thus they had relevance again. That man now being the primary impetus for "We need to change the Labour party, that was utter horseshit, my god, what a shit ideology.".

We shouldn't bully the Liberals. They're perfectly legitimate.

Absolutely.


Do you remember when they were in government last time and how they achieved major changes to the direction of the country?
Certainly nothing like UKIP, who could never achieve such systemic reforms.


They're a relevant political party with relevant ideas and an alternative vision for the UK.

dude UKIP was a single issue party and they got that single issue

i agree they're worth something (and that it is hilarious that one of the most effective and best labour people left for the lib dems) though

The Archregimancy wrote:

Andsed wrote:I keep hearing about this boyfriend slapping incident. What happened there?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-47686844

You'll find a range of perspectives over the issue between those who would argue this is an unforgiveable assault that exemplifies gender-based double standards in Western politics to those who would argue that it was a one-off incident that shouldn't have any longer-term impact on her political career now that she's apologised and the parties involved have all moved on, with various shades of opinion in between.

MRAs didn't care much about the assault. They took the "One-off incident" approach, right up until she tried to justify it.

hot take: tim farron's position was reasonable and moral given his circumstances and it's only due to the UK's insistence on ideological and cultural purity he got booted. essentially, he was punished for being a wrongthinker.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-47686844

You'll find a range of perspectives over the issue between those who would argue this is an unforgiveable assault that exemplifies gender-based double standards in Western politics to those who would argue that it was a one-off incident that shouldn't have any longer-term impact on her political career now that she's apologised and the parties involved have all moved on, with various shades of opinion in between.

MRAs didn't care much about the assault. They took the "One-off incident" approach, right up until she tried to justify it.

Does her former partner feel any continued abuse from the indecent, or is suffering mental trauma from it after x many years?

Fartsniffage wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
I believe you can get an ointment for that.

I happen to have a generous supply if you'd you'd like some. It does, however, turn your skin a vibrant shade of orange.


Anyway, I'm genuinely torn over the leadership race. It's a choice between a competent and safe pair of hands who'll spend his entire leadership answering questions about his role during the coalition years, or an unknown quantity with a safer majority who'll spend her entire leadership answering questions about pansexuality and the time she slapped her boyfriend.

Oh yes, they both have policies too; Davey is slightly more centre-right than Moran, who's therefore slightly more centre-left. But it's a matter of emphasis rather than serious disagreement, and realistically my focusing on superficials merely predicts what both NSG and much of the British media will spend most of the next few years wringing their hands over.

I can only hope that if Moran is elected, she has better answers to the pansexuality and boyfriend slapping than Tim Farron offered over gay marriage; though I think we can safely assume she doesn't think the latter is a sin.

So you're saying Donald Trump is a Lib Dem sufferer? Sounds dodgy but okay...

Ah, no; while one specific symptom is similar, and it's understandable that the layperson might confuse the two, libdemitis and cockwombletan are two entirely distinct medical conditions.

For one, I assure you that people who suffer from the former are far more likely to be witty, debonair, urbane, and devilishly handsome while keeping a very large and stiff PhD degree in their front pocket.

Ostroeuropa wrote:

The Archregimancy wrote:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-o ... e-47686844

You'll find a range of perspectives over the issue between those who would argue this is an unforgiveable assault that exemplifies gender-based double standards in Western politics to those who would argue that it was a one-off incident that shouldn't have any longer-term impact on her political career now that she's apologised and the parties involved have all moved on, with various shades of opinion in between.

MRAs didn't care much about the assault. They took the "One-off incident" approach, right up until she tried to justify it.

Yes, yes.

Note that I did at least do you the courtesy of deleting the snarky 'and no prizes for guessing where Ostro stands' line from my original post before hitting 'submit'.

Celritannia wrote:

Ostroeuropa wrote:
MRAs didn't care much about the assault. They took the "One-off incident" approach, right up until she tried to justify it.

Does her former partner feel any continued abuse from the indecent, or is suffering mental trauma from it after x many years?

No.

Mr Davis has long-since moved on.