UK Politics Thread (Part 3)

[WeeJoe]

@Klopptimist

I smacked Jnr once. It worked.

[Dane]

@aussielad

Should kids be made to wear muzzles in public? or kept on a leish?

Probably an argument for some these days, yes.

[Bekloppt]

Senior Conservatives hit out at Suella Braverman’s ‘racist rhetoric’

[Klopptimist]

I I agree that you were factually incorrect and beautify ironically hoist by your own petard.

[Klopptimist]

No, it’s parenting.

[redalways]

Someone posting actual news related to UK politics here?

Burn the witch!

[redalways]

Voter ID: One in four unaware they need ID to vote in May elections

Nothing like a bunch of supposed conservatives concerned about wasting public money, just wasting public money.

[Klopptimist]

If you’re not a functioning member of society, you shouldn’t be voting anyway. 1/4 of people don’t know about the requirements. Then they shouldn’t be voting!

For heaven’s sake mankind, you should be paying attention to local issues.

Thanks Douglas.

@ILLOK Terry had nothing appropriate I could remember.

[redalways]

@Klopptimist

If you’re not a functioning member of society, you shouldn’t be voting anyway. 1/4 of people don’t know about the requirements. Then they shouldn’t be voting!

For heaven’s sake mankind, you should be paying attention to local issues.

Remain would have won overwhelmingly then.

In any case, I’d love to know why Oyster 60+ cards are considered valid ID but not the 18+ cards. The accepted ID basically means that younger people are getting disenfranchised.

[peterroberts]

@redalways

I’d love to know why Oyster 60+ cards are considered valid ID but not the 18+ cards. The accepted ID basically means that younger people are getting disenfranchised.

Because they have copied laws enacted in the US by Republican legislatures to suppress the youth vote which overwhelmingly votes Democrat.

[RedWhippet]

@redalways

The accepted ID basically means that younger people are getting disenfranchised.

Or as it should be seen, the whole point of the policy to begin with.

Apparently, phase two of this strategy is under way whereby they encourage people to vote by post but then give them an envelope that sends the form to the local Tory party address than the electoral commission.

[Klopptimist]

@redalways

Remain would have won overwhelmingly then.

And yet they didn’t. #winningteam

[Mascot]

@Klopptimist

I agree that you were factually incorrect and beautify ironically hoist by your own petard.

I wasn’t factually incorrect. Nor was I factually incorrect when I said you tried to shift the debate onto a semantic point because you didn’t want to engage the actual one. You avoided all the other questions I asked to hone in on me saying ‘a few decades ago’ and ‘the seventies’ in the same breath. That’s not winning an argument, it’s being a pedant.

So I’ll give you it again.

The language used by people like you to justify hitting children is the same as the language that men used to use to justify hitting women back when that was more socially acceptable.

If you want to argue with me, argue with that.

@Klopptimist

No, it’s parenting.

It’s fucking awful parenting. You should feel ashamed you hit a child. Without legislation to directly criminalise it, it is already taboo, and you should be fully aware of the evidence out there that is is damaging in many different ways, as well as being totally ineffective.

There is an irony in your caustic attitude to what you perceive as bad parenting, the particularly short shrift you give anyone struggle to raise kids on their own, or in poverty. And then you proudly admit to using violence on your own kids.

You simply cannot comprehend any possibility that you are wrong, or that a less violent approach to children can be effective. You asked the question whether anyone who didn’t smack their kids actually had decently behaved ones, and in the same breath decided they were lying if they said yes.

I have never smacked my kids. I’d be fucking ashamed of myself if I did. My kids aren’t naughty or uncontrollable. And if they do act up a bit sometimes, they are kids, and they are allowed to be kids within clear boundaries.

Smacking a child isn’t about the child. It’s about you. You’ve lost control, or you couldn’t be arsed explaining something to a child in a way they could understand, or you lacked the imagination to engage with a child in a way they respond to.

I guarantee in thirty years time, we’ll look at hitting children in the same way we now look back at men justifying hitting their wives

[Mascot]

@Klopptimist

If you’re not a functioning member of society, you shouldn’t be voting anyway. 1/4 of people don’t know about the requirements. Then they shouldn’t be voting!

I think in a situation where an expired older persons ID card is accepted over an in date young person ID, we’re not in the realms of just take an interest in society.

We talking about a calculated and deliberate attempt to stifle democracy and disenfranchised targeted people.

[Klopptimist]

Come for dinner one day. We’ll see who’s kids are better behaved.

You won’t. Guess why……

[Klopptimist]

@Mascot

You simply cannot comprehend any possibility that you are wrong,

Because I’m not.

[odin_telamon]

Because you won’t be serving tofu and have a no Sandals policy ?

[Mascot]

@Klopptimist

Come for dinner one day. We’ll see who’s kids are better behaved.

You won’t. Guess why……

I am sure you’d think my kids are abominably behaved. I don’t expect them to act like it’s 1876.

[Mascot]

@Klopptimist

@Mascot

You simply cannot comprehend any possibility that you are wrong,

Because I’m not.

Pretty much every reputable scientific study suggests hitting your children is a terrible idea. You are totally, completely and utterly wrong.

[Klopptimist]

Prove it.

Just because I wear a stove pipe hat, smoke a pipe and rest my feet on the servants in the evening does not make me wrong.

But you’re welcome to dinner any time. What game should we play? The wifi is obviously disabled.