SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: Remainers have lied constantly. I do not see any benefit for allowing their lies to stand unaddressed? As far as I am concerned, it is word against word, or more precisely, some dude on twitter who counted the attendees from news footage and someone using “flow and fill rates and crowd density monitoring”. I know who I will trust, but it is not important to me. I couldn't care less if it was 50,000 or 5,000,000. It all reminds me of the Trump inaugural attendee discussion. I guess you are afraid to admit there is a growing number of people who want a second referendum. As for lies. Ehem, remember that list I posted about the leave campaign's lies before the 2016 referendum? Let's be serious and admit that among humans there will always be liars, and it is likely you will find such people on both sides of the fence here? No wait, you are the one who couldn't even find something positive to say about the Eu when challenged, so it is probably futile to speak level with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 14 hours ago, Graeme said: The two aren't really comparable. The North East of England is a region of England, it is not one of the two countries party to the treaty of Union, it isn't a separate legal jurisdiction. Furthermore, there seems to be little-to-no appetite for any form of self-government in the North East of England, which rejected a devolution proposal by 78%. Scotland, on the other hand, voted in favour by nearly the same margin (74%), has consistently elected a majority of pro-independence political representatives for most of the last decade, and ongoing opinion polling suggests roughly half of the Scottish population now believes in independence (sometimes just under, sometimes just over). Many of the impacts of Tory policy may have been similar in Scotland and England's North East (as in other places in England like Liverpool, or in Wales) - but Scotland's democratic response has been very different, and this is probably largely due to the apparatus of statehood that Scotland has, giving us a greater sense of autonomy and a stronger platform to manifest our opposition and resistance to the current direction of British politics. The two are absolutely comparable if we are highlighting the socio-economic argument. The socio-economic cannot just be confined to Scotland's internal border but encompass large non-Scottish sections of the United Kingdom: Northern England, Midlands, Wales and Northern Ireland. Unless of course you simply reject the socio-economic argument and rely on naked nationalism? The ironic thing is you are espousing nation statism - very much so - yet also desiring to belong to an organisation (the EU) who are thoroughly opposed to the nation state, claiming the nation state is dead and that the future of the polities of Europe resides upon Eurofederalism! Or if you are to go to Verhofstadt's extremity, ''empire''! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 8 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: As far as I am concerned, it is word against word, or more precisely, some dude on twitter who counted the attendees from news footage and someone using “flow and fill rates and crowd density monitoring”. I know who I will trust, but it is not important to me. I couldn't care less if it was 50,000 or 5,000,000. It all reminds me of the Trump inaugural attendee discussion. I guess you are afraid to admit there is a growing number of people who want a second referendum. As for lies. Ehem, remember that list I posted about the leave campaign's lies before the 2016 referendum? Let's be serious and admit that among humans there will always be liars, and it is likely you will find such people on both sides of the fence here? No wait, you are the one who couldn't even find something positive to say about the Eu when challenged, so it is probably futile to speak level with you. Not a bit suspicious of a well-rounded figure such as ''one million''? Oh, they're a lot of people espousing this ''People's Vote'' - I do not deny. I disagree with them entirely, just as I disagree with you. I find little to praise the EU upon - I am unapologetic about that. The EU is thoroughly repellent to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said: Not a bit suspicious of a well-rounded figure such as ''one million''? Oh, they're a lot of people espousing this ''People's Vote'' - I do not deny. I disagree with them entirely, just as I disagree with you. I find little to praise the EU upon - I am unapologetic about that. The EU is thoroughly repellent to me. Oh, do you think I believe it was exactly 1,000,000? I always assumed it was more meant to signify scale rather than an exact number of protesters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazey Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 9 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: Unless of course you simply reject the socio-economic argument and rely on naked nationalism? I seem to remember you rejecting my socio-economic arguments re Brexit in favour of a nationalistic argument on a number of occasions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 54 minutes ago, Dazey said: I seem to remember you rejecting my socio-economic arguments re Brexit in favour of a nationalistic argument on a number of occasions. I do believe I have discussed the economic with you however the difference between us is that I take a multifaceted approach to the subject of Brexit whereas you are only interested in one thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 hour ago, SoulMonster said: Oh, do you think I believe it was exactly 1,000,000? I always assumed it was more meant to signify scale rather than an exact number of protesters. If you want to believe a trillion people showed up, that is your prerogative as this argument is just too boring, even for a Soul argument. It is even more boring than the time you got a bee in your bonnet about fallacies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 I just confidently voted for a progressive! I have no idea how y'all let your conservatives get so emboldened and unwieldy. I got 99 problems but a conservative ain't one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, soon said: I just confidently voted for a progressive! I have no idea how y'all let your conservatives get so emboldened and unwieldy. I got 99 problems but a conservative ain't one. You voted for a Black and White Minstrel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: If you want to believe a trillion people showed up, that is your prerogative as this argument is just too boring, even for a Soul argument. It is even more boring than the time you got a bee in your bonnet about fallacies. Not about fallacies but about you claming there were numerous fallacies in an article and when challenged on it, all you could say was, "but, but, they called Churchill a racist!" (not a 100 % accurate quote). I still find it hilarious. As for how many attending the march: Yes, that is not interesting at all. What is interesting is why you would be so eager to challenge a high number and what sort of argumentation you would be willing to use. It says a lot about you. Edited October 21, 2019 by SoulMonster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soon Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, DieselDaisy said: You voted for a Black and White Minstrel? No, but I would have had our progressive movement not been so strong!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 18 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: I do believe I have discussed the economic with you however the difference between us is that I take a multifaceted approach to the subject of Brexit whereas you are only interested in one thing. Uhm, when Dazey lectured you on the economy you ended up stating you cared more for other aspects of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, SoulMonster said: Not about fallacies but about you claming there were numerous fallacies in an article and when challenged on it, all you could say was, "but, but, they called Churchill a racist!" (not a 100 % accurate quote). I still find it hilarious. He is off again!!! 2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: As for how many attending the march: Yes, that is not interesting at all. What is interesting is why you would be so eager to challenge a high number and what sort of argumentation you would be willing to use. It says a lot about you. I will always seek out facts- especially over lies. It is me, need I remind you, who is the only one here who has analysed the European Union in exhaustive detail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, SoulMonster said: Uhm, when Dazey lectured you on the economy you ended up stating you cared more for other aspects of it. I believe I have discussed the economic at great length (remember all of those conversations about the UK budgetary contributions). Another lie then. My opinions on the EU are multi-faceted, as that is the only true approach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, DieselDaisy said: I will always seek out facts- especially over lies. It is me, need I remind you, who is the only one here who has analysed the European Union in exhaustive detail. Funny, because you seem to be more driven by emotions than facts. Like rejecting an article because you got so flustered over it stating Churchill was a racist and then lying about it containing numerous fallacies. That, Diesel, is the opposite of what you claim to be. 1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said: I believe I have discussed the economic at great length (remember all of those conversations about the UK budgetary contributions). Another lie then. I never stated you haven't discussed it at great length, just that Dazey lectured you on it and that you, then, dismissed it as not being that important to you. On the booze again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, SoulMonster said: Funny, because you seem to be more driven by emotions than facts. Like rejecting an article because you got so flustered over it stating Churchill was a racist and then lying about it containing numerous fallacies. That, Diesel, is the opposite of what you claim to be. I didn't reject the article because I was flustered. I rejected it because it was unacademic, unhistorical and decontextalised. It also completely misread the history of the political parties in Britain. I am surprised you posted it actually. In fact I am surprised it was a Norwegian who wrote it as Norway is usually more informed about British political culture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Bloody hell, you're desperate for your daily dose of argument today Soul? If you want an argument with me you should support The Hundred (yes, believe it or not but Brexit, Winston Churchill and the machinations of British politics are nowhere close to the thing that is pissing me off right now). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 10 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: I didn't reject the article because I was flustered. I rejected it because it was unacademic, unhistorical and decontextalised. Yet you claimed it contained "numerous Churchill fallacies" but couldn't name one. Such nonsense is more indicative of people being led by emotions than facts yet desperately trying to make it sound it isn't so. 11 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: Bloody hell, you're desperate for your daily dose of argument today Soul? If you want an argument with me you should support The Hundred (yes, believe it or not but Brexit, Winston Churchill and the machinations of British politics are nowhere close to the thing that is pissing me off right now). I just find it hilarious that you claim to care about facts. What’s the Hundred? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: Yet you claimed it contained "numerous Churchill fallacies" but couldn't name one. Such nonsense is more indicative of people being led by emotions than facts yet desperately trying to make it sound it isn't so. I just find it hilarious that you claim to care about facts. What’s the Hundred? Mercenary cricket competition with plastic teams and plastic format. You'd love it. It is basically cricket redesigned for Soul Monster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 Just now, DieselDaisy said: Mercenary cricket competition with plastic teams and plastic format. You'd love it. It is basically cricket redesigned for Soul Monster. Cricket looks absurdly boring. In the words of Slash: "Whenever I come to England, it's either during Wimbledon or the cricket season. I guess it's always the fuckin' cricket season over here, right? I've been watchin’ cricket for years now and still can't figure out what the rules are. You hit the fuckin' ball and then these guys run from one side of the square to the other... I mean, who invented this game?" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: Cricket looks absurdly boring. In the words of Slash: "Whenever I come to England, it's either during Wimbledon or the cricket season. I guess it's always the fuckin' cricket season over here, right? I've been watchin’ cricket for years now and still can't figure out what the rules are. You hit the fuckin' ball and then these guys run from one side of the square to the other... I mean, who invented this game?" Slash can certainly play the fiddle well but I wouldn't trust him to complete a toddler's jigsaw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said: Slash can certainly play the fiddle well but I wouldn't trust him to complete a toddler's jigsaw. Its a ballgame, Slash don't have no truck with balls, as evidenced by the absolute lack of em displayed in getting back with ol' ginger bollocks after that cancer jibe right around the time his Mum fell off the perch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, Len Cnut said: Its a ballgame, Slash don't have no truck with balls, as evidenced by the absolute lack of em displayed in getting back with ol' ginger bollocks after that cancer jibe right around the time his Mum fell off the perch. We have just went from Brexit, Churchill, Cricket to Slash within the space of only a few posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulMonster Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said: We have just went from Brexit, Churchill, Cricket to Slash within the space of only a few posts. Well in the spirit of this, let's move on to written language. Is "we have just went" correct grammar? I would have thought it was "we have gone" that was correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieselDaisy Posted October 21, 2019 Share Posted October 21, 2019 2 minutes ago, SoulMonster said: Well in the spirit of this, let's move on to written language. Is "we have just went" correct grammar? I would have thought it was "we have gone" that was correct. ''We have went'' is fairly awful grammar actually. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.