comment by Coolio (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 16 seconds ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'm not going round in another circle on this one, SatNav. Clear that any attempt to explain my POV will be futile and further entrench your view of me. You go on defending the meritocracy and opposing racism (and I guess, best of luck to working class people of colour).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought as much.

You continue to argue the person, not the content. It’s a really….erm…..good way to debate and learn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You brought him up so him and his character are fair game if we're gonna be taking advise from him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But not his ideas or data? Ok then Coolio. You’ll also do well with that level of thinking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say his ideas could not be discussed. I merely pointed out that his character is also relevant in the discussion if brought up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it’s pretty poor to ignore his ideas and data and just go after the political aisle that he generally relates to. In fact, it’s worse than poor, it’s playground stuff that I would expect from Robbing or whomever this Kobbie Mainoo gimp is.

But not as cool as the disinformation one so I'm going back

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
I’ve not even bothered to go into your daft, unsubstantiated vague assertions that Tories are racist and want to keep the poor, poor.
———


It’s only unsubstantiated if you have been living under a rock your whole life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, the Robbing school of vagary. No specifics, no reasoning, no examples.

You represent your ideology so well, it’s a cliché at this point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean Robbing can see through your posts and finds them funny as well? Not a surprise, he’s got above average intelligence.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'm not going round in another circle on this one, SatNav. Clear that any attempt to explain my POV will be futile and further entrench your view of me. You go on defending the meritocracy and opposing racism (and I guess, best of luck to working class people of colour).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought as much.

You continue to argue the person, not the content. It’s a really….erm…..good way to debate and learn
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I genuinely am leaving this thread now, after multiple attempts. But I've said nothing about you and your character there, only about the implications of your argument. That you see the above as an ad hominem, while reacting to a point I made about the tendentiousness of a source you cited with your tremendously adult 'wah wah Trump' bоllocks tells us everything we need to know about your ability to engage in reasoned debate.

And I think I can speak for Dazza here in saying it's not who you've cast your vote for that's the point in describing your politics as a poster here on this website. It's the style and content of what you write and the fairly obvious source material. Conservative minded people vote for all sorts of parties. I once chatted to someone canvassing for the Green party who said that one of my neighbours told them they were making their mind up whether to vote for the Greens or Ukip. That neighbour was obviously not particularly committed to a particular party - but if you unpacked his ideas, they would have had some consistent ideological themes.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 3 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it beyond your ability to understand that you can agree with some elements of a party and not others but on the weight of things choose that party? Yes I’m sure that’s way above your level of thinking.

I’ve not even bothered to go into your daft, unsubstantiated vague assertions that Tories are racist and want to keep the poor, poor.


Not that you want to know because if you did have even a modicum of curiosity as to how someone different to you thinks or votes because you are ignorant and closed-minded. I have tended to vote based on economics and also the individual party leader. Which is why I will probably vote for Starmer in the upcoming election because (whilst I think it unlikely) I don’t like coalitions, I think they are weak governments.

He’s not a true Labour man, a New Labour man but that aligns with what I want more than a Corbyn type would.

I didn’t vote for Boris and I didn’t vote for Sunak obviously. I voted against Corbyn in 2017 not really in favour of May but better than Corbyn.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

This point you make here is exactly the trap that so many fall into, even some of the 'bright ones' on here.

Some are so quick to pigeon-hole someone and apply all the worst traits or negative perceptions of that group. All Tories are racists, xenophobes with no empathy for the poor or those worse off in society.

Like you i place emphasis on certain key issues and being someone who has always worked in the private sector, owned my own business for a while, and now work self-employed as a consultant, the economy is forefront in my decision making as it has the biggest impact on my life. My life experience pushes me more towards a government prioritising private enterprise rather than growing the State. How i voted in recent times has pretty much matched yours, as has the reasoning. I voted remain in the referendum.

It amuses me that some pretty well-read, considered folk on here, who take themselves quite seriously, when it comes down to it, they come from a simple, very poorly considered place of "all Tories are the same, they're all khunts" An entrenched hatred that influences their dealings with anyone they pigeon-hole as such.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'm not going round in another circle on this one, SatNav. Clear that any attempt to explain my POV will be futile and further entrench your view of me. You go on defending the meritocracy and opposing racism (and I guess, best of luck to working class people of colour).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought as much.

You continue to argue the person, not the content. It’s a really….erm…..good way to debate and learn
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I genuinely am leaving this thread now, after multiple attempts. But I've said nothing about you and your character there, only about the implications of your argument. That you see the above as an ad hominem, while reacting to a point I made about the tendentiousness of a source you cited with your tremendously adult 'wah wah Trump' bоllocks tells us everything we need to know about your ability to engage in reasoned debate.

And I think I can speak for Dazza here in saying it's not who you've cast your vote for that's the point in describing your politics as a poster here on this website. It's the style and content of what you write and the fairly obvious source material. Conservative minded people vote for all sorts of parties. I once chatted to someone canvassing for the Green party who said that one of my neighbours told them they were making their mind up whether to vote for the Greens or Ukip. That neighbour was obviously not particularly committed to a particular party - but if you unpacked his ideas, they would have had some consistent ideological themes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then leave.

Your vague commentary is such a waste of time. I mean wait a minute; conservative people had some consistent ideological themes? You’re fking kidding me, right? Stop the presses.

I’d much rather you read Thomas Sowell, looked at his data and said ‘look at this graph Sat Nav it shows that AA does work and it’s from Sowell’s own work’ then we could have a useful back and forth about something that you had asked for but refused to read because he is a conservative and something something Trump.

Instead you play identity politics, which is as boring and predictable as it gets.

You cannot speak for Dazza as he has already stated quite clearly that who I vote for is the only determining factor for him. That was my point from the start.

comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 2 minutes ago
I’ve not even bothered to go into your daft, unsubstantiated vague assertions that Tories are racist and want to keep the poor, poor.
———


It’s only unsubstantiated if you have been living under a rock your whole life.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, the Robbing school of vagary. No specifics, no reasoning, no examples.

You represent your ideology so well, it’s a cliché at this point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You mean Robbing can see through your posts and finds them funny as well? Not a surprise, he’s got above average intelligence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
lol if above average intelligence is the standard to look at then that explains a lot.

I really wish you weren’t such an ideologically possessed idiot because I actually quite like your football and United opinions. But I’m sad to say that I cannot take people seriously that start a conversation with Tory this and Tory that. You’re a bloody sheep, blinded by hate and propaganda. Shame.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'm not going round in another circle on this one, SatNav. Clear that any attempt to explain my POV will be futile and further entrench your view of me. You go on defending the meritocracy and opposing racism (and I guess, best of luck to working class people of colour).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought as much.

You continue to argue the person, not the content. It’s a really….erm…..good way to debate and learn
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I genuinely am leaving this thread now, after multiple attempts. But I've said nothing about you and your character there, only about the implications of your argument. That you see the above as an ad hominem, while reacting to a point I made about the tendentiousness of a source you cited with your tremendously adult 'wah wah Trump' bоllocks tells us everything we need to know about your ability to engage in reasoned debate.

And I think I can speak for Dazza here in saying it's not who you've cast your vote for that's the point in describing your politics as a poster here on this website. It's the style and content of what you write and the fairly obvious source material. Conservative minded people vote for all sorts of parties. I once chatted to someone canvassing for the Green party who said that one of my neighbours told them they were making their mind up whether to vote for the Greens or Ukip. That neighbour was obviously not particularly committed to a particular party - but if you unpacked his ideas, they would have had some consistent ideological themes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Argue the person’ was referring to Sowell, not me RR. Would have thought that clear given I had said it several times now.

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 3 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it beyond your ability to understand that you can agree with some elements of a party and not others but on the weight of things choose that party? Yes I’m sure that’s way above your level of thinking.

I’ve not even bothered to go into your daft, unsubstantiated vague assertions that Tories are racist and want to keep the poor, poor.


Not that you want to know because if you did have even a modicum of curiosity as to how someone different to you thinks or votes because you are ignorant and closed-minded. I have tended to vote based on economics and also the individual party leader. Which is why I will probably vote for Starmer in the upcoming election because (whilst I think it unlikely) I don’t like coalitions, I think they are weak governments.

He’s not a true Labour man, a New Labour man but that aligns with what I want more than a Corbyn type would.

I didn’t vote for Boris and I didn’t vote for Sunak obviously. I voted against Corbyn in 2017 not really in favour of May but better than Corbyn.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

This point you make here is exactly the trap that so many fall into, even some of the 'bright ones' on here.

Some are so quick to pigeon-hole someone and apply all the worst traits or negative perceptions of that group. All Tories are racists, xenophobes with no empathy for the poor or those worse off in society.

Like you i place emphasis on certain key issues and being someone who has always worked in the private sector, owned my own business for a while, and now work self-employed as a consultant, the economy is forefront in my decision making as it has the biggest impact on my life. My life experience pushes me more towards a government prioritising private enterprise rather than growing the State. How i voted in recent times has pretty much matched yours, as has the reasoning. I voted remain in the referendum.

It amuses me that some pretty well-read, considered folk on here, who take themselves quite seriously, when it comes down to it, they come from a simple, very poorly considered place of "all Tories are the same, they're all khunts" An entrenched hatred that influences their dealings with anyone they pigeon-hole as such.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Absolutely.

As I said above it’s shame that Dazza is one of these people as I liked his football posts.


Even the generally more polite ones like RR will occasionally expose themselves as the ideologues that they are. You can always see these people coming a mile off because they don’t ever ask people questions about who they are, what they think, why they think that; they just jump straight to their conclusions.

I also voted remain for what it’s worth, Brexit was always going to be an absolute mess.

Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 20 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 3 minutes ago
I'm not going round in another circle on this one, SatNav. Clear that any attempt to explain my POV will be futile and further entrench your view of me. You go on defending the meritocracy and opposing racism (and I guess, best of luck to working class people of colour).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought as much.

You continue to argue the person, not the content. It’s a really….erm…..good way to debate and learn
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I genuinely am leaving this thread now, after multiple attempts. But I've said nothing about you and your character there, only about the implications of your argument. That you see the above as an ad hominem, while reacting to a point I made about the tendentiousness of a source you cited with your tremendously adult 'wah wah Trump' bоllocks tells us everything we need to know about your ability to engage in reasoned debate.

And I think I can speak for Dazza here in saying it's not who you've cast your vote for that's the point in describing your politics as a poster here on this website. It's the style and content of what you write and the fairly obvious source material. Conservative minded people vote for all sorts of parties. I once chatted to someone canvassing for the Green party who said that one of my neighbours told them they were making their mind up whether to vote for the Greens or Ukip. That neighbour was obviously not particularly committed to a particular party - but if you unpacked his ideas, they would have had some consistent ideological themes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Argue the person’ was referring to Sowell, not me RR. Would have thought that clear given I had said it several times now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So all of this:

But I've said nothing about you and your character there, only about the implications of your argument. That you see the above as an ad hominem, while reacting to a point I made about the tendentiousness of a source you cited with your tremendously adult 'wah wah Trump' bllcks tells us everything we need to know about your ability to engage in reasoned debate.


Was a load of bllcks which told you nothing but told me that once again you jump to a conclusion after completely misunderstanding the other person (for clarity this is referring to me now okie day?).

It's like he's done the theory and excelled at it.

But is yet to do the practical, where you deal with actual human beings.

Can't be assed to read back but nobody is trying to defend Trump as not being racist right?

comment by Cinciwolf----JA06 NFL Fantasy CHAMP 2023 (U11551)
posted 5 minutes ago
Can't be assed to read back but nobody is trying to defend Trump as not being racist right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahah no that case has not been put forward

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf----JA06 NFL Fantasy CHAMP 2023 (U11551)
posted 5 minutes ago
Can't be assed to read back but nobody is trying to defend Trump as not being racist right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahah no that case has not been put forward
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank feck for that, was worried for a minute

comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.

Satnav.

I suggest you have a look at Richard Kahlenberg's book where he argues for class based AA instead of race based AA. he's done studies on leading Universities which have dropped raced-based AA in favour of race-neutral methods and shown that they worked in most cases. A lot of left wing are for the disadvantaged and not just a section of disadvantaged.

comment by Cinciwolf----JA06 NFL Fantasy CHAMP 2023 (U11551)
posted 56 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by Cinciwolf----JA06 NFL Fantasy CHAMP 2023 (U11551)
posted 5 minutes ago
Can't be assed to read back but nobody is trying to defend Trump as not being racist right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hahah no that case has not been put forward
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank feck for that, was worried for a minute
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But he’s definitely not racist.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine having to make something up that no-one here has argued in order to try and make a point?

Just imagine that.

comment by Echo Chamber (U23154)
posted 1 hour, 6 minutes ago
Satnav.

I suggest you have a look at Richard Kahlenberg's book where he argues for class based AA instead of race based AA. he's done studies on leading Universities which have dropped raced-based AA in favour of race-neutral methods and shown that they worked in most cases. A lot of left wing are for the disadvantaged and not just a section of disadvantaged.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't have a problem with class based AA either.

In a lot of places it will have little to no real difference with race based AA but it would be better than race based AA IMO. But it seems more idealistic than realistic.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine having to make something up that no-one here has argued in order to try and make a point?

Just imagine that.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Never go full Real Clowns Satty.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 38 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine having to make something up that no-one here has argued in order to try and make a point?

Just imagine that.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sat Nav just denies everything he thinks posts and claims that everybody elses counter views are over simplified and unclear.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine having to make something up that no-one here has argued in order to try and make a point?

Just imagine that.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Never go full Real Clowns Satty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Show me where anyone advocated against more qualified candidates from minority groups? I certainly didn’t.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine having to make something up that no-one here has argued in order to try and make a point?

Just imagine that.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Never go full Real Clowns Satty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Show me where anyone advocated against more qualified candidates from minority groups? I certainly didn’t.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pah semantics! You know darn well what he meant.

Here we go FFS.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA606 (U1282)
posted 51 minutes ago
comment by RB&W -Same Place-Same Club-Same Man (U21434)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Imagine thinking that allowing more qualified candidates from minority groups to be interviewed and considered for top jobs in 'established institutions', was a form of racism in itself, as it 'logically' could prevent a white person from getting that job.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine that something like that makes sense in some people's heads and you begin to understand why the past is so insane and facked up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Imagine having to make something up that no-one here has argued in order to try and make a point?

Just imagine that.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Never go full Real Clowns Satty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Show me where anyone advocated against more qualified candidates from minority groups? I certainly didn’t.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pah semantics! You know darn well what he meant.

Here we go FFS.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No it’s not semantics.

Discrimination on the basis of race is…racial discrimination - something I am against. Imagine that.

You guys are fine with it, we established that pages ago.