|
In order to ensure that this thread meets TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we ask that everyone please adhere to this mod note. Posts containing only Tweets or articles adds nothing to the discussions. Therefore, when providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments will be actioned upon. All in all, please continue to enjoy posting in TL General and partake in discussions as much as you want! But please be respectful when posting or replying to someone. There is a clear difference between constructive criticism/discussion and just plain being rude and insulting. https://www.registertovote.service.gov.uk |
On July 15 2018 17:41 schaf wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2018 00:14 ahswtini wrote:On July 13 2018 21:32 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
It's not really clear what the DUP actually wants to me. As far as I can work out, they want to remain in the EU, but as a consolation prize they are absolutely determined to have a hard brexit so there is a trade border with Ireland. DUP's only red line is no border in the irish sea. the DUP do not want to remain in the EU, and want out of the customs union. however, if westminster proposes staying in the customs union, even the DUP will support remaining just to ensure there is no sea border. the DUP also supports a frictionless border between north and south as exists now. How is that consistent? Restriction of movement and leaving the single market should necessarily involve a physical border in Ireland, does it not?
Their main point is that they want to be treated exactly the same as the rest of Great Britain: either a border between ALL of Britain and ALL of the EU, or no border. Basically, getting on a boat from Dublin to Liverpool should be exactly the same in terms of required bureaucracy as hopping over the land border to Belfast. Consequently, a boat from NI to England should require the same bureaucracy as a train from Bristol to London (none whatsoever).
Being treated equally to England is more important to them than whether Brexit happens, so they will torpedo any Brexit solution that gives a special status for migration or customs between NI and Ireland. I don't think they're opposed to a special treaty between the whole UK and Ireland, but that is unacceptable to the EU.
|
If people are backing Boris Johnson, they deserve all the consequences of Brexit. I have no regrets for them.  Also, I'm sure Labour will be the next government. You can't simply rule for 8 years, including Brexit, no matter how you handle it, without losing power. Unless you deal with Brexit fantastically well but that's out of reach for like 99.9% of possible PMs.
|
People aren't backing Boris even most brexit supporters know he is a prat. They just want what they voted for in the referendum. Labour will win if this carries on but if the cons got a competent leader who can deliver brexit and move on then Labour will struggle, Corbyn is still a terrorist supporting, anti-Semitic and near communist leader.
|
On July 15 2018 19:03 Zaros wrote:
People aren't backing Boris even most brexit supporters know he is a prat. They just want what they voted for in the referendum. Labour will win if this carries on but if the cons got a competent leader who can deliver brexit and move on then Labour will struggle, Corbyn is still a terrorist supporting, anti-Semitic and near communist leader.
The first description of Corbyn is equally true of May, the second I don't think is really accurate (not to mention the Tories own ENORMOUS islamophobia problem, Michael Fabricant literally just tweeted a racist cartoon about Sadiq Khan before getting caught with an apartheid South Africa flag in his living room lol), the third description is part of the appeal. Underestimate his electability at your own peril.
|
On July 15 2018 21:16 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2018 19:03 Zaros wrote:
People aren't backing Boris even most brexit supporters know he is a prat. They just want what they voted for in the referendum. Labour will win if this carries on but if the cons got a competent leader who can deliver brexit and move on then Labour will struggle, Corbyn is still a terrorist supporting, anti-Semitic and near communist leader. The first description of Corbyn is equally true of May, the second I don't think is really accurate (not to mention the Tories own ENORMOUS islamophobia problem, Michael Fabricant literally just tweeted a racist cartoon about Sadiq Khan before getting caught with an apartheid South Africa flag in his living room lol), the third description is part of the appeal. Underestimate his electability at your own peril.
That fact that he isnt 20 points ahead in the polls when compared to the mess that is the current government shows his electability.
|
On July 15 2018 21:28 Zaros wrote:Show nested quote +On July 15 2018 21:16 kollin wrote:On July 15 2018 19:03 Zaros wrote:
People aren't backing Boris even most brexit supporters know he is a prat. They just want what they voted for in the referendum. Labour will win if this carries on but if the cons got a competent leader who can deliver brexit and move on then Labour will struggle, Corbyn is still a terrorist supporting, anti-Semitic and near communist leader. The first description of Corbyn is equally true of May, the second I don't think is really accurate (not to mention the Tories own ENORMOUS islamophobia problem, Michael Fabricant literally just tweeted a racist cartoon about Sadiq Khan before getting caught with an apartheid South Africa flag in his living room lol), the third description is part of the appeal. Underestimate his electability at your own peril. That fact that he isnt 20 points ahead in the polls when compared to the mess that is the current government shows his electability.
ehat platform could he possibly stand on that would give him that lead?
|
How do you win against the EU? You sue them. Or, that's what Trump said.
|
On July 15 2018 19:03 Zaros wrote:
People aren't backing Boris even most brexit supporters know he is a prat. They just want what they voted for in the referendum. Labour will win if this carries on but if the cons got a competent leader who can deliver brexit and move on then Labour will struggle, Corbyn is still a terrorist supporting, anti-Semitic and near communist leader.
Citation needed. This sounds awfully like mindless Tory rhetoric without any basis in reality.
|
On July 15 2018 16:54 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2018 06:01 Zaros wrote:
Well to cap off a successful visit Trump cant even follow protocol around the Queen and blocks her from inspecting the troops while striding ahead of her.
On another note, apart from occasional blocking, I don't really care if he walks in front of her just because "she's the queen". Monarchy is outdated.
I care, not because I give a flying monkeys to the Queen and the rest of the royal family, but because he actions seems purposefully, whether by design or by lack of mindfulness, to ignore etiquette and show a complete lack of respect the the country who are playing host to him. Who ever wants to see their country being shat on by the leader of a foreign country? If it was the other way round, that etiquette and respect was lacking when any foreign dignitary was visiting USA, you can be sure that Trump will notice and shove the Queen.
|
You say you don't care about royals, yet you write "the Queen". She's just "the queen" to me. Ordinary person. He was so excited to meet the queen, I doubt he wanted to upset her on purpose. He just doesn't know appropriate manners when near royals, but I don't blame him - I don't care either. Also, I hate Trump, but I hate hierarchy in monarchy more. Just because someone is a foreigner, they don't have to know all the little rules. The only thing you can criticise is his advisers.
|
On July 16 2018 04:31 sc-darkness wrote:
You say you don't care about royals, yet you write "the Queen". She's just "the queen" to me. Ordinary person. He was so excited to meet the queen, I doubt he wanted to upset her on purpose. He just doesn't know appropriate manners when near royals, but I don't blame him - I don't care either. Also, I hate Trump, but I hate hierarchy in monarchy more. Just because someone is a foreigner, they don't have to know all the little rules. The only thing you can criticise is his advisers. 10000000% chance he was briefed on 'all the little rules'. Like it happens for every person that meets the Queen.
|
I capitalise Queen because that's simply the way I write Queen when referring to people who are a queen. I'll write the Queen of Norway, and the Queen of Thailand all the same. It should also be obvious why I don't need to add a country for the Queen in this context either, just in case you are asking. Also Trump is the President of USA; if he truly was excited, you can be sure he would be told about diplomatic protocols by is own staff and to adhere to it, and even if he wasn't excited, he would be told exactly the same thing.
|
On July 16 2018 04:31 sc-darkness wrote:
You say you don't care about royals, yet you write "the Queen". She's just "the queen" to me. Ordinary person. He was so excited to meet the queen, I doubt he wanted to upset her on purpose. He just doesn't know appropriate manners when near royals, but I don't blame him - I don't care either. Also, I hate Trump, but I hate hierarchy in monarchy more. Just because someone is a foreigner, they don't have to know all the little rules. The only thing you can criticise is his advisers.
That's because his grammar is better than yours. Queen should be capitalised because it is a title.
|
Ironic considering that he once shat on me for having misperfect spelling and grammar. I'm improving though, hopefully. Anyways, I suppose we should be happy for the small mercy that Trump didn't apply his Trump yank and handshake on the Queen, as he normally does on head of states. No sc-darkness, before you ask, it's not because I care about her in particular, but because she is a 92 year old woman. Also that she diplomatically represents the UK.
|
On July 16 2018 06:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ironic considering that he once shat on me for having misperfect spelling and grammar. I'm improving though, hopefully. Anyways, I suppose we should be happy for the small mercy that Trump didn't apply his Trump yank and handshake on the Queen, as he normally does on head of states. No sc-darkness, before you ask, it's not because I care about her in particular, but because she is a 92 year old woman. Also that she diplomatically represents the UK.
And whether or not you're a monarchist, the Queen is an amazing representative for our country. Even people who hate us love the Queen.
It'll be interesting when she dies. The monarchy's functionally done without her. Nobody likes Charles and her grandsons are kinda common. I can see someone beginning a push to end the institution in some form.
|
On July 15 2018 23:36 sc-darkness wrote:How do you win against the EU? You sue them. Or, that's what Trump said.
I did see this also. I dont know if he lives in alternate reality or what ...
|
On July 16 2018 17:51 Silvanel wrote:I did see this also. I dont know if he leaves in alternate reality or what ...
How can you not know that at this point? He still claims he had the largest inauguration crowd size of all time. Trump's world is one in which he is best, everything he does is perfect, and everyone loves him.
|
On July 16 2018 06:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ironic considering that he once shat on me for having misperfect spelling and grammar. I'm improving though, hopefully. Anyways, I suppose we should be happy for the small mercy that Trump didn't apply his Trump yank and handshake on the Queen, as he normally does on head of states. No sc-darkness, before you ask, it's not because I care about her in particular, but because she is a 92 year old woman. Also that she diplomatically represents the UK.
Well, if you feel it's ironic considering English is my third language, while it's the native one for you, then so be it. Still, I'd say the queen and not honour their title. It's worthless anyway. What did they achieve? They won the genetic lottery without doing anything. That's a great achievement. I'm impressed. I think I'm on Labour's side in this case even though left wing isn't my cup of tea.
|
On July 17 2018 04:07 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2018 06:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ironic considering that he once shat on me for having misperfect spelling and grammar. I'm improving though, hopefully. Anyways, I suppose we should be happy for the small mercy that Trump didn't apply his Trump yank and handshake on the Queen, as he normally does on head of states. No sc-darkness, before you ask, it's not because I care about her in particular, but because she is a 92 year old woman. Also that she diplomatically represents the UK. Well, if you feel it's ironic considering English is my third language, while it's the native one for you, then so be it. Still, I'd say the queen and not honour their title. It's worthless anyway. What did they achieve? They won the genetic lottery without doing anything. That's a great achievement. I'm impressed. I think I'm on Labour's side in this case even though left wing isn't my cup of tea.
My guy, you capitalize titles, names and proper nouns in the English(notice the capitalization) language. There is no difference between the Queen, Mayor or Chief Garbage Collector in written English. They are all titles and all get capitalized. It has nothing to do with “achievement”, it is how the language works mechanical.
|
On July 17 2018 04:07 sc-darkness wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2018 06:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Ironic considering that he once shat on me for having misperfect spelling and grammar. I'm improving though, hopefully. Anyways, I suppose we should be happy for the small mercy that Trump didn't apply his Trump yank and handshake on the Queen, as he normally does on head of states. No sc-darkness, before you ask, it's not because I care about her in particular, but because she is a 92 year old woman. Also that she diplomatically represents the UK. Well, if you feel it's ironic considering English is my third language, while it's the native one for you, then so be it. Still, I'd say the queen and not honour their title. It's worthless anyway. What did they achieve? They won the genetic lottery without doing anything. That's a great achievement. I'm impressed. I think I'm on Labour's side in this case even though left wing isn't my cup of tea.
I'd say she lost the genetic lottery, who would want to be born an heir to a constitutional monarchy having your whole life dictated to you. The Queen has devoted her whole life to serving her countries obviously the U.K. more than others. She served in WW2 and spent over 60 years as a figure head, diplomat and adviser without any complaints and without making any mistakes while Britain went from Global Empire to the modern day.
Then there is all the indirect benefits of a constitutional monarchy as a uniting force for the nation, a defence against despotism and fascism.
Edit:
In the mean time parliament is in meltdown, the government accepted ERG amendments to legislation which basically makes its brexit plan impossible. Which has now in turn set Remainer MPs mad and revolting against the government.
May is also now so worried about a confidence vote she is proposing to pack up parliament for the summer break a week early so there is no time for a plot to gather pace.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
