Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Also when a pundit for the 99 Cup final, said he wanted Man United to win.
  2. Ideally, if our elected officials were capable of acting rationally and in good faith, I'd be in favor of what would effectively be a constitutional convention to overhaul the entire thing, and getting rid of or fixing the EC would be part of that. But neither that nor a targeted fix of the Constitution to address the EC are going to happen because it's nearly impossible to amend the Constitution, given the applicable standards for doing so, and our elected officials by and large aren't capable of acting rationally and in good faith. Short of that, something like the National Popular Vote bill, which turns on coordinated changes to state laws, without changing the Constitution, may be the best shot at doing something productive. Honestly, though, I'd have to look at it a lot more closely to see exactly how it would work and what kind of potential adverse consequences it might have (whether intentional or unintentional). I think two senators per state is another glaring issue that should be addressed - I know two per state from foundation seems very noble/idealistic but California Vs North Dakota looks a bit uneven now.
  3. NJS

    We did a Brexit

    Is their precedent anywhere? I'd take a stab at not allowing a simple majority to decide it. Like you need 60% or something. And limit the campaign funding and do it from public money, with no other funding allowed. some cursory reading i did a while ago suggests that referendums that are on large constitutional changes elsewhere in the world would not be on a simple majority, if they were foolish enough to hold one as we did The two recent Irish ones on gay marriage and abortion worked well to settle moral/ethical questions and they featured required majorities. I think similar ones in the UK on say abolishing the house of Lords or monarchy (I can dream) would be okay but shit like this shouldn't have been within a million miles of a referendum.
  4. NJS

    Mobile phones

    The fingerprint scanner on the 6 is on the home button on the front.
  5. Cooper's big pitch for leadership was to expand the "sure start" programme. Corbyn's was a thing called socialism. Slight difference.
  6. He's from about 6 miles outside of OT. There's practically no way you're going to pick a non league side as your team really. He can declare what he likes really, unless they find him in a man u top how would they prove differently? Greater Manchester/Lancashire is a bit funny as there are shit loads of teams who are in the 92 but usually "lower league" - you then get shit loads of people from these places who follow these clubs but also follow one of the Manchester clubs - Oldham/United, Altringham/City etc etc. I fucking bet this cheating cunt is Alty/United.
  7. He's not there for Roe Vs Wade. He's there because he's stated an incumbent president can't be indicted for a criminal offence.
  8. Back then, it being a new competition, it was considered by many a director/board and the media and indeed fans in general (no doubt many of our own fans back in the day too), as a pointless competition where even the European Cup was still regarded with a certain disdain in many quarters as inferior and somewhat beneath the myopic superiority of our our domestic competitions. But to those that knew football, managers, especially the newer breed, players who considered representing their country abroad as the highest honour and fans not easily swayed by the xenophobic and self righteous opinion of the media filled with hacks who once saw the typewriter as the enemy to the pen, it was a tough exciting competition and equal in many ways to the European Cup in terms of quality and the path to glory. Football was quite different back then, Malmö were a crack European team for example and when we won the Fairs Cup so were we and had that team been added to by someone more ahead of the times or keeping of the times back then like a Revie or a Clough, the Fairs Cup winning team could have been moulded into league and European cup champions. Look at the gates, the battles, the scenes when we brought it home, it wasn’t just some throw away competition or meaningless trophy. The mackems and others may mock it today or try and day it wasn’t a proper competition, but that’s sour grapes. We thought we would walk it and although we won it, we soon realised just how big an achievement it was given the quality of opposition, the competitiveness of all those that entered it and what it took to win it. Again, the scenes speak for itself. Ask any of those surviving players today what they think about this so-called loser trophy and they wouldn’t swap it for a league title or an FA Cup and I don’t think those fans that were lucky enough to see us lift it would either, not then and not now. Sadly UEFA have devalued their competitions in a sporting context over the years, but to win any piece of silverware today in Europe is still a mighty feat to achieve whether it’s Real Madrid in the CL or Chelsea in the Europa League. Although their spoilt fans will probably regard their success in that as highly as winning the reserves league... It should also be noted that Don Revie rated Ujpest Dozsa highly as they'd knocked Leeds out and predicted they'd hammer us in the final.
  9. what do you mean by this? Like, people object to him because they think he's 'unelectable' or whatever, rather than because they disagree with his principles. I don't think so anymore. Some people were saying that pre-2017 election as cover, because they didn't want to admit to membership they opposed left-wing policies. The election proved everyone wrong on that front and most of those people either came around or, if they were being disingenuous, dropped the act. Some have taken the act on again. I believe pretty much anyone pushing the 'unelectoral' line at this stage is being disingenuous. Centrists are ideologically opposed to the Corbyn left. No doubt Blair would rather May as PM than Corbyn, he's almost said as much. A lot of MPs didn't even attempt to campaign on the manifesto and instead pointed to their own record as constituency MPs - this was their strategy to reclaim the party when (as they expected/hoped) Labour hot wiped out as early polls suggested. Maybe they sort of agreed with the manifesto but decided to follow the plan - however you can't tell me people like Kendall believe in socialism.
  10. Do you think they have any choice when every single media outlet including the BBC pursue the anti-semite thing every day? "Today I'm here to talk about an investment bank" "Yeah but what about them Jews Mr Corbyn?" His opponents within and without the party think they can get him on this when they know they can't get him on the "normal" outers like party support or fidelity (imagine if he was as much of a shagger as Johnson?) His policies by the way are not extreme - they're moderately left wing - the country has been brainwashed into thinking anything approaching a non-neoliberal slant is communism - if you look at polling on policy the majority support all the "good" things labour stands for. I think he could be a better leader but unless any replacement is from the same "wing" as him, labour will face the annihilation that all centre left parties in europe who've clung to the Blairite vision have suffered in the last few years.
  11. Is it a good sign that he's in deep shit over the stuff Mueller handed off as not worthy of his time?
  12. Not sure if that's a direct reference to me - but yeah, I don't think he loves terrorists. Not really a reference to you, but my point was what is people's actual belief about these things? That he loves blowing people up and shooting them? Or just that he's prepared to try and understand more people than your average centrist and always starts from a position of dialogue? True - I can see your point. Perhaps Darth has it right - he's just naive about how these things are perceived more widely. Whether that means it's the right approach though is questionable - there must be a point where you just don't engage in the way he has done with Hamas/IRA and/or you don't argue the toss over the definition of anti-semitism? Maybe it's a combination of naivety and stubbornness. Although I assume you would regard that as being a combination of a lack of spin and a willingness to stick to principles! this is a case in point though, they did accept the definition in full but not the examples no? some of the examples basically prevent criticism of Israeli policy vs. the Palestinians and could see members hauled up for wanting to defend Palestinians but it's been turned into something else I definitely need to do some more reading on the HRA definition of anti-semitism as I did read a piece (and annoyingly I can't find it again - might have been Hugo Rifkind in the Times) that actually went through the wording and was of the view that adopting the wording recommended by the HRA categorically did not prevent the criticism of Israeli policy. Having said that, I understand that that argument isn't the strongest if I can't provide the article and haven't gone through the wording myself. The problem example is that it defines the description of the founding of Israel as a racist endeavour to be anti-semitic. My opinion is that it probably was racist and the law passed recently confirms it imo. I don't believe I'm antisemitic though - I just call things as I see them.
  13. NJS


    All of the fuckers screaming 92'ers at us but didn't think of Watson, Todd, Baxter or Raich Carter.
  14. Question for the US posters: I saw a bit of Bill Maher the other night where he was advocating for the non-republican billionaires like Bezos and Zuckerberg to spend real money on the elections. Now I know there's a problem with the republicans suppressing voters mainly through ID requirements and harder to get to polling stations which affects the poor so I was wondering whether it would be legal for rich Democrats to setup programmes to pay for passports or whatever and for mass transportation to polls? Might be worth considering if its possible.
  15. To be honest when I was growing up in the 70s and 80s it wasn't that different - it was always leeds/arsenal/Liverpool at the top and a good season for us was a cup run. It's alway been money or occasionally an outstanding manager/perfect storm that's rocked the boat. However I don't remember it being as bad as only winning 10 or 12 games if you're lucky (though 42 games helped that). I think what has changed though is the pervasive negative approach by too many teams.
  • Create New...