Why do people insist on saying “The American experiment”??

Where are all the passionate leftist politicians.

“We will fix the roads”

“We will find public services better like the police, fire departments and medicare so you never have to worry if help is coming in your hour of need”

“We will ensure everyone has access to healthcare whether rich or poor, insured or not so you never need to worry about losing your job and your health cover at the same time.”

“We will invest in public transport to better connect our rural communities to make it easier to get well paying jobs even if you don’t live in metropolis”

"we will invest in green energy and transport and retrain workers from the fossil fuel industry to improve the quality of the air you breathe, without putting coal and oil workers out in the cold“

“We will pay for this by taxing corporations who have for too long got away with paying lower tax rates than you, all while making record profits and creating billionaires like Bezos and Musk who use their immense power to convince you that what is good for you is actually bad for you.”

Vote for Trump, defeat demons.

Pick one

I would have thought if Hunt is adamant there is no black hole that he would support the OBR in vindicating him. He only seeks to hide this because there must be a black hole. The only other explanation is that the OBR has taken sides against him, but that would seem unlikely in such a short time since Labour took office. More likely the conservatives were suppressing the OBR when in office.

P.s. Isn’t that the OBR’s job anyway?

“Let me tell you why I claim to support trump.”

The real reasons would never be spoken aloud.

And therein lies the crux of the matter. People like him know they can get away with it because good people will do good things and allow him to make his stand without suffering any consequences for it. I’m not really suggesting those voters should suffer the consequences of his actions , but he certainly wouldn’t be in office long if they did

It’s called having your cake and eating it too.

He gets to claim he is against government spending but also protects his voters with relief money and he can vote against the funding because he knows it will very likely pass. If there is no disaster he can claim to be fiscally responsible, and if there is one, he can say that the voters wanted it so they should get it.

I say funds like this should be assigned according to a priority based on these votes. His district would get the scraps and leftovers if anything and they could squarely blame him for it. It would stop these guys paying politics with things that directly impact their voters lives or get voted out.

Ok so I apologise for my earlier snarky reaction but I felt zahille7’s response was somewhat condescending. Particularly since it is terminology recognised by three major English dictionaries, one of which is widely regarded as the leading authority on the English language… https://www.oed.com/dictionary/inverted-comma_n?tl=true https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/inverted-commas https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/inverted-commas

… So just because you have never heard of something, doesn’t give you licence to be rude to someone or talk down to them as if they are stupid for their choice of phrasing. Or maybe it just means you aren’t British…

deleted by creator

Who is we? The global pedant society?

It’s not “famous” that should be in inverted commas, but “artist”.

Ok so can we start with a really rough day of policing election fraud, inciting insurrection, business fraud, not paying suppliers, sexual assault, stealing classified government documents, and shitting your pants in public. Then maybe the word will get out and we won’t have to go further.

… Ok maybe not the last one. That’s just unfair.

Maybe if they weren’t destabilising the world, their citizens might feel happier about bringing children into it.

I know what the point was, but Biden is included as if he is part of some political dynasty. He was VP. A very normal situation, 19 out of 49 have run for president. It’s like being promoted through the ranks until you get to the top. Isn’t that kinda normal in most careers?

So why is it “insanely improbable” for Biden, someone who qualified for the job over decades, to be “chosen” as opposed to anyone else.

We aren’t talking here about how much cash it requires to become president which raises the bar above most people’s head.we are taking about political dynasties.

So I say again, including Biden as if it is some statistical anomaly or stranglehold on politics is disingenuous, especially if you exclude Harris.

Her situation of running for president after serving as vice president is EXACTLY the same as Biden unless you want to split hairs and say he served 2 terms and her only 1. So if you want to say Biden was given a silver spoon, so was she.

Biden is not a dynasty. But if you insist he is, so is Harris, and that makes the original premise flawed.

I don’t think it’s really fair to include “Biden” alongside “Bush” and “Clinton” and NOT include “Harris”, just to make a point. The point is the Bush and Clinton represent two people each, a dynasty as it were. Biden is just one person. You might as well add then Harris since she has served as VP just like Biden, or Trump but I get the feeling this is intended to somehow make the statement that Harris represents a new breed of politics, a break from the old. That may or may not be true, but it doesn’t hinge on this meaningless metric.

“since 1981 there has never been an election without a Bush, Clinton, Biden, Trump or Harris.”

The problem with conservatism though is that their voters will think this is a good thing. Taxes are bad full stop, so these companies are clever by lowering their tax bill. They don’t see that the salaries are obscene. Then they complain about public services and infrastructure being bad.

Why stop at the supreme Court. Maybe all judges should have this “protection”.

Oh wait but then Donnie would be in jail.

Just be honest Don. You want to jail anyone who disagrees with you.

Surely the day is approaching where enough Americans have been personally affected by gun violence that there are more that have than haven’t. I often wondered if the reason it persists is because it is something that happens to other people so there is no feeling of urgency to put it at the center of politics. But it happens every fucking month??? …wait, I just checked and I’m being too generous with “month”. They happen almost every day. We only seem to hear about them once or twice a month outside America. You guys have them more regularly than sports games.

You think the only reason people could find destructive, violent behaviour to be unusual or difficult to understand is because they have no passion in their own lives?

I’m just a little sad that there are people in the world who have grown up in such violent, loveless homes that they can’t conceive of finding violent behaviour over a sports game disgusting.

I wonder how many of wives and partners who get the shit kicked out of them when their passionate “alpha” male’s favourite team loses would agree with you. Oh it’s OK, he had just lived such a full, passionate life that he sometimes loses his self control for a moment.