Electoral Idiots...

Drew_TNBD

Emp_Fab said:

Drew_TNBD said:

I mean... I'd like some kind of response @Emp_Fab. C'mon. Don't chicken out.

Naah.  I couldn't be arsed to read your post to be honest. Waaay too long.  I'm heading up to London now anyway.  Driving and forumming is frowned upon.

Well, when you say stuff like this:

Emp_Fab said:

Seriously - it would be interesting to discuss your thoughts and opinions

And then come back with a response like that, you can hardly be surprised that I:

A: Don't take your opinions seriously

B: Respond with piss-taking and denigration.

It's usually all you deserve.

To take these discussions seriously and to fully explore them and all their ancillary topics, it requires thought, consideration, and verbosity.

You're not a very intelligent person, that much is clear. You can't handle these kinds of issues without getting aggressive and dismissive. Which is why you get the responses that you do.

I'm gonna start a sub-reddit that is just full of screenshots of all of your posts. It'll take me a while but once I do it, it'll be hilarious!

chrispy108

I really dislike Pug owning, English IT workers who live in South Wales and drive their BMW too fast. Total bellends the lot of them.

That's generalising, not a personal insult, so perfectly ok by the rules.

Emp_Fab

Are you completely unaware of your usual posting style?  What you just said was like reading a delusional Donald Trump speech!  *I* get aggressive??!!    Jesus H.  You need counseling son.  You are without question the most verbally offensive member we have, your reputation for exploding with fury and abuse is legendary.  You've been in the cooler more times than Cool Hand Luke and BetFred are offering 1/2000-on that you are going to get yourself banned by St.Shitmuncher's Day.  Christ, they're only offering 1/500-on that the sun will come up tomorrow!

Sporky

Hmm. Struck a nerve there.

Drew_TNBD

Emp_Fab said:

Are you completely unaware of your usual posting style?  What you just said was like reading a delusional Donald Trump speech!  *I* get aggressive??!!    Jesus H.  You need counseling son.  You are without question the most verbally offensive member we have, your reputation for exploding with fury and abuse is legendary.  You've been in the cooler more times than Cool Hand Luke and BetFred are offering 1/2000-on that you are going to get yourself banned by St.Shitmuncher's Day.  Christ, they're only offering 1/500-on that the sun will come up tomorrow!

As I said to Sporky earlier in a lovely private conversation, I don't care about being coolered or banned. It literally has no bearing on my life. If I'm honest, it used to. But since becoming a father and since my band had it's refresh, I'm far too busy and happy to be caring about this place.

I gave you the serious minded and well intended response you were looking for, and you spat it back with vitriol and cynicism. You're a child - and not even a particularly smart one.

bingefeller

Drew_TNBD said:

Emp_Fab said:

Drew_TNBD said:

I mean... I'd like some kind of response @Emp_Fab. C'mon. Don't chicken out.

Naah.  I couldn't be arsed to read your post to be honest. Waaay too long.  I'm heading up to London now anyway.  Driving and forumming is frowned upon.

Well, when you say stuff like this:

Emp_Fab said:

Seriously - it would be interesting to discuss your thoughts and opinions

And the come back with a response like that, you can hardly be surprised that I:

A: Don't take your opinions seriously

B: Respond with piss-taking and denigration.

It's usually all you deserve.

To take these discussions seriously and to fully explore them and all their ancillary topics, it requires thought, consideration, and verbosity.

You're not a very intelligent person, that much is clear. You can't handle these kinds of issues without getting aggressive and dismissive. Which is why you get the responses that you do.

I'm gonna start a sub-reddit that is just full of screenshots of all of your posts. It'll take me a while but once I do it, it'll be hilarious!

I'd sub to that!

chrispy108

Emp_Fab said:

You are without question the most verbally offensive member we have, your reputation for exploding with fury and abuse is legendary. 

No, he really isn't.

He might call people rude words, but you're genuinely offensive. It's not all about swears.

And what is your obsession with Donald Trump? Seriously, you mention him in every thread it seems. How does he affect your life so much?

Drew_TNBD

chrispy108 said:

Emp_Fab said:

You are without question the most verbally offensive member we have, your reputation for exploding with fury and abuse is legendary. 

No, he really isn't.

He might call people rude words, but you're genuinely offensive. It's not all about swears.

And what is your obsession with Donald Trump? Seriously, you mention him in every thread it seems. How does he affect your life so much?

That was kind of one of my points. Emp seems to get triggered very much by rude or filthy words. But doesn't bat an eyelid when he genuinely offers, wholeheartedly and sincerely, an offensive disparaging opinion about a sector of society.

The hubris and lack of awareness is baffling. It's like staring at the sun until my eyes fall out of my skull.

I do use rude and filthy language. I do also fly off the handle and become a human brillo pad. I accept that.

But all this.... all this is another level of Hitler!

TheBlueWolf

Emp_Fab said:

Are you completely unaware of your usual posting style?  What you just said was like reading a delusional Donald Trump speech!  *I* get aggressive??!!    Jesus H.  You need counseling son.  You are without question the most verbally offensive member we have, your reputation for exploding with fury and abuse is legendary.  You've been in the cooler more times than Cool Hand Luke and BetFred are offering 1/2000-on that you are going to get yourself banned by St.Shitmuncher's Day.  Christ, they're only offering 1/500-on that the sun will come up tomorrow!

Yet Drew is the problem?

Oh dear

Drew_TNBD

I mean, look at these idiots!!









Just look at them!! Voting for who their friends vote for, and voting for who they always voted for! How dare they! Idiots! 

fields5069

I can't say this forms the bulk of voting, but I have seen a lot of people on FB with "vote leave" photos etc., who vote based on what they would like to believe instead of voting based on fact.

It's all anecdotal and no doubt insulting to those who voted with a full grasp of the facts, but I see a lot of shared mis-information on FB. One post in particular concerned the main reason why we shouldn't pay the EU the fictional sum of 100 million Euros - the "fact" that we won the 2nd World War on our own and no-one else in Europe helped.

This is actually a fact, insomuch as this person will never be convinced otherwise. We generally have a love of people who talk tough without saying anything of substance.

JezWynd

bingefeller said:

JezWynd said:

To address the OP. There would be more sense in performing competence tests on the candidates rather than putting the onus on the voter to sift through the endless promises and emotional bullshit that gets spewed out at election time. For instance, I'm certain that Trump would have failed any basic competency test and thus saved the world from potential disaster.

Trump is a smart guy, I'm sure he would have passed a "basic competency test".  

I'm thinking of a test that looks at candidates emotional fitness, not whether they can parrot the constitution or count from 10 backwards. Trump's emotional unfitness reveals itself constantly, numerous psychiatrists wrote to Obama before the election expressing their feeling that Trump was not 'fit for purpose'.

To ensure that candidates. are fully rounded human beings, whatever their ideology, would hopefully result in a better quality of candidate emerging - it's certainly cheaper and more efficient than testing the fitness of the entire voting public.

Drew_TNBD

JezWynd said:

bingefeller said:

JezWynd said:

To address the OP. There would be more sense in performing competence tests on the candidates rather than putting the onus on the voter to sift through the endless promises and emotional bullshit that gets spewed out at election time. For instance, I'm certain that Trump would have failed any basic competency test and thus saved the world from potential disaster.

Trump is a smart guy, I'm sure he would have passed a "basic competency test".  

I'm thinking of a test that looks at candidates emotional fitness, not whether they can parrot the constitution or count from 10 backwards. Trump's emotional unfitness reveals itself constantly, numerous psychiatrists wrote to Obama before the election expressing their feeling that Trump was not 'fit for purpose'.

To ensure that candidates. are fully rounded human beings, whatever their ideology, would hopefully result in a better quality of candidate emerging - it's certainly cheaper and more efficient than testing the fitness of the entire voting public.

How do you measure emotional fitness? That seems to imply that there is a gold standard to emotions and that some people are 8th place Bowser rip offs and other people are 1st place Yoshi types, with a few Peaches and Toads in the middle.

I'm not sure emotions really work that way tbh.

Also if someone is emotionally unfit, are they suffering from a mental health issue and if so, are you proposing we discriminate against those with mental health issues? Someone with depression can't be the president all of a sudden?

JezWynd

A depressed President could be a serious liability, esp. if they took it upon themselves to cure the world's ills by pressing the red button or were so paranoid that they assumed every approach was a covert attack. I suppose that's why the US system has a series of checks and balances, the separation of certain branches of govt. - things incidentally that Trump has shown an interest in overturning or changing to suit his purpose.

Drew_TNBD

JezWynd said:

A depressed President could be a serious liability, esp. if they took it upon themselves to cure the world's ills by pressing the red button or were so paranoid that they assumed every approach was a covert attack. I suppose that's why the US system has a series of checks and balances, the separation of certain branches of govt. - things incidentally that Trump has shown an interest in overturning or changing to suit his purpose.

Okay, so we're saying that in an ideal world a depressed person couldn't be the president. Gotcha.

Are we also extending that out to other jobs? Can a depressed person be a teacher? An IT administrator? A cleaner?

CabbageCat

Emp_Fab said:

1. I'm sorry but I just can't accept that any sane person would vote for Trump.

If you don't have the imagination or are prepared to put in the investigation to see why people voted for him then that's a failure on your part. Sure, it's easier just to assume they are all mad and you are not but that is extremely unlikely to be true.

JezWynd

Drew_TNBD said:

JezWynd said:

A depressed President could be a serious liability, esp. if they took it upon themselves to cure the world's ills by pressing the red button or were so paranoid that they assumed every approach was a covert attack. I suppose that's why the US system has a series of checks and balances, the separation of certain branches of govt. - things incidentally that Trump has shown an interest in overturning or changing to suit his purpose.

Okay, so we're saying that in an ideal world a depressed person couldn't be the president. Gotcha.

Are we also extending that out to other jobs? Can a depressed person be a teacher? An IT administrator? A cleaner?

No.

Snap

CabbageCat said:

Emp_Fab said:

1. I'm sorry but I just can't accept that any sane person would vote for Trump.

If you don't have the imagination or are prepared to put in the investigation to see why people voted for him then that's a failure on your part. Sure, it's easier just to assume they are all mad and you are not but that is extremely unlikely to be true.

cos he's going to make america great again, that's why!

I have American family. Talking to them last year, I understood more why Trump appeals. America is a very divided country, with lots of real and perceived inequality. There was also a lot of frustration with Obama. Trump played a different tune.

Drew_TNBD

JezWynd said:

Drew_TNBD said:

JezWynd said:

A depressed President could be a serious liability, esp. if they took it upon themselves to cure the world's ills by pressing the red button or were so paranoid that they assumed every approach was a covert attack. I suppose that's why the US system has a series of checks and balances, the separation of certain branches of govt. - things incidentally that Trump has shown an interest in overturning or changing to suit his purpose.

Okay, so we're saying that in an ideal world a depressed person couldn't be the president. Gotcha.

Are we also extending that out to other jobs? Can a depressed person be a teacher? An IT administrator? A cleaner?

No.

Ok. 

Drew_TNBD

fields5069 said:

I can't say this forms the bulk of voting, but I have seen a lot of people on FB with "vote leave" photos etc., who vote based on what they would like to believe instead of voting based on fact.

It's all anecdotal and no doubt insulting to those who voted with a full grasp of the facts, but I see a lot of shared mis-information on FB. One post in particular concerned the main reason why we shouldn't pay the EU the fictional sum of 100 million Euros - the "fact" that we won the 2nd World War on our own and no-one else in Europe helped.

This is actually a fact, insomuch as this person will never be convinced otherwise. We generally have a love of people who talk tough without saying anything of substance.

But you do accept that people who voted to remain also voted on what they would like to believe instead of voting based on fact... right?