Jump to content

Regal Beagle

Members
  • Content Count

    5,135
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Regal Beagle last won the day on July 8

Regal Beagle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

343 Legend

About Regal Beagle

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 08/08/1984

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. 15:00 should be just around the time Leyton Orient score the winner.
  2. Another crazy idea...we could just play the race/misogyny card. There's a very strong precedent for that too.
  3. I don't think you can take polling seriously at the moment. I also don't think you can claim a manifesto was very popular when they pretty much tried to simultaneously promise everything to everyone whilst also promising nothing. It was a joke of a manifesto. Evidenced by the pensions thing in the run up to the vote when Labour just ad-hoc added another 50 billion to compensate for the pension age changes for women. Labour's manifesto was nonsensical. Free internet connections for everyone. I mean literally no one had argued anything about internet access either before or afte
  4. still exactly the same. There's clearly some anomalies in the election. Whether it's fraud or not I don't know. I suspect they'll be able to find small scale individual frauds, possibly on both sides from partisan people who get involved in the counting etc but I don't think any results will change. Be it people counting ballots that are unclear for one candidate, or finding reasons to throw out others, or back dating postal stamps or something like that. They've apparently got hundreds of sworn affidavits from people who are under oath claiming to have witnessed this sort of stuff
  5. Suspend her for a week and then re-instate her. That should do it.
  6. We have threads for all those issues. This is a thread to discuss the fact that Labour have been found responsible for unlawful acts of discrimination and their reaction to it. There's an easy way for Labour to ensure that we don't focus on their racism at the next election. It's within their power to show the country that they're not racist. I suspect that suspending Corbyn for a week before re-instating him, only for the parliamentary arm to keep him suspended is not really dealing with the issue. It's ignoring it or at least delaying it. If Labour cannot
  7. Maybe you should ask me if you are struggling to understand instead of assuming I mean the direct opposite of what I post? Just a helpful suggestion.
  8. Yes, I'm strongly against authoritarianism and sometimes you have to given consent to things you do not like. He's making allegations. They should be debunked properly not by some hacky partisan journalists. As long as that happens in whatever the proper context is - be it police, courts, election officials then I'm happy, and we can move on with Biden knowing that the allegations are officially debunked. I'm pretty sure we want the same outcome over this particular matter. I'm pretty sure we agree on everything but who should decide whether or not the claims are false
  9. No I'm not, that's another thing you are accusing me of which I've never said or done. If you support Democracy so strongly Then you shouldn’t mind there being another vote then.
  10. I never said I agreed with Trump, I said I disagreed with him. I didn't say there was lots of evidence that suggests he could be right. I think you are deliberately misinterpreting this: I said I didn't think there were any legal claims that could overturn the election: I haven't engaged in any conspiracy theories. I acknowledged the existence of the ALLEGATIONS whilst also disagreeing with them. You are the one engaging in conspiracy theories. This is getting insane now.
  11. I don't believe him? How many times do I have to say that? Also, for maybe the 3rd time - if he has no evidence then the cases should be thrown out. It sounds like we agree on both of those points so far? And lastly. How can you say that the plan isn't to win a case but to sow doubt and delay? That sounds scarily conspiratorial for someone who is speaking out against conspiracies. Who should decide whether or not there is no evidence in your view?
  12. You haven't seen me defend every single criticism though have you? You've seen me defend a handful of criticisms, relatively speaking. Also this whole thing started when I said I disagreed with his claims about the election. So it's not quite right that I've not made a single criticism either is it?
  13. See that's exactly what your mistake is. I'm a fan of Trump, he has done some great things as president which I've spoken about on here previously. I've defended him against some unfair accusations and smears which I've also spoken about on here previously. I stand by all of that. As I say, I'm accountable for my words, not accountable for the things you THINK I've said. I've not defended him on his post election day behaviour though have I? You assume that that's what I would do. Even to the point that when I say the direct opposite, you still think that I'm defending
  14. Perhaps some of the remainers on OVF should tell Sir Keir how difficult it is to strike a trade deal and also point out that as America is so much bigger than us, we can't get a good deal.
  15. I've not misinterpreted anything. I know what Trump is saying and I know he is trying to overturn the projected election result. It still doesn't change the fact that there are witnesses giving sworn statements about misconduct in relation to the election, a candidate who is adamant that the election has been stolen and likely millions of people in the nation who either believe him or at least believe that the democrats are capable. What harm do you think investigating these claims based on their merit will do out of interest? Either there will insufficient
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy