Rayvin

As I said, this isn't a cornerstone of what I'm saying. Although, if Assange was non white and taking refuge out in Afghanistan, I think it'd be different. Clearly she isn't going to drone strike the UK.

That link didn't work for me mate...

I thought I was being optimistic with my 2-0 initial scoreline. The Fish talked me up to 3-0 and now you're pushing me to 4-0. I'm gonna stick with 3-0, not getting too carried away here...!

Well in that case good, it sounds as though this will hurt him some small amount at least.

Seriously? Why would he, is the status really that important to him?

:lol: That's such a heartless (but true) description...

Here man, your posts have got 'narrow 1-0 loss where Mitrovic gets sent off' written all over them This is still NUFC remember...

FFS the Bush family has apparently left no depth unplumbed.

Aye very true. Is he related to Dubya? Still amazed it ever got this close.

Fantastic closing paragraph

Well said, actually. Agreed.

I suppose so. That'd have me pretty relaxed though, he doesn't strike me as someone who'd be able to turn them around fast enough, really.

Nice one.

That's good to hear, he totally deserves it. Although I bet he couldn't care less.

I would definitely need to verify that one. ...not that I believe you.

I thought you'd appreciate my due diligence The thing is, I have no issue being wrong about things as long as I'm wrong about them in a way that makes sense to me. For what it's worth, given the Article 50 issue with Corbyn, I'm now less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt about the train ride.

New Labour were a vessel for Neo-Liberalism but IMO it's really closer to a Tory ideology, so I'd group them into that as well, pretty much since Thatcher. It's just been the political norm, whatever your colours, for decades. It's bigger than party politics. Monbiot has a good article on it here which sums up most of my views: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot

I'm in two minds on that. I'd be all for them sacking Moyes if Allardyce wasn't available again, but given that he is, they do actually have someone vaguely competent to turn to. Then again, Allardyce isn't anywhere near as great as he thinks he is, and may not even take it. If he doesn't, I genuinely don't know who they'd take.

Then the truth is unhelpful.

Where did I ignore Corbyn's lies? I acknowledged them. I wasn't aware of some of them, admittedly, until ewerk pointed it out. But I called them for what they were as soon as I'd verified it. On the Brexit bit, I just flat out disagree with you on why Labour has torn itself apart. How on earth that makes me a hypocrite is beyond me. It could make me wrong. But not a hypocrite.

I've had a scan back actually, and this all started because of something stupid I did in truth. You asked what people had against Clinton, and I put forward the things that people say. I didn't really intend for that to become 'my position' in this whole debate, which is why I've been a bit surprised to have to defend my views on and around it. Taking it one step at a time is fine, except that I view her as a step back. Trump would be a whole different issue - I'm not at all sure what that world would look like - but Clinton does nothing to address the problems unless she turns out to be one of the most effective Presidents in a long time. The very act of not addressing them, makes the situation worse. So it's not like we're pressing pause, in my view. I don't blame Corbyn for Brexit in any meaningful sense. I blame Neo-Liberalism.

You think I'm being a hypocrite because of what, exactly?

I have? I said she should be president - but the drone strike point is something I can totally believe her saying. I actually don't quite understand your issue here come to think of it. You've harped on and on at me about some of the opinions I have about Clinton that I have said, repeatedly, aren't my main concern with her candidacy. I'm not actually sure why I even engaged with it given that it's just used to smokescreen away from my actual point, the answer for which was never provided. What happens if the status quo continues and we get more Brexit style fiascos? What then? Logically, either your position has to be that you don't think this will happen - which is fine, although I'd be curious as to why you'd think that - or you agree that more of this shit will happen, but don't see any need for a change in course. Welcome to other suggestions but those are the only two I can see presently. Forget about whether or not I think Clinton is a liar, because it absolutely doesn't matter. You aren't going to change my opinion on it, and I don't even see the need to justify it, really (although I have done so).

I dunno. It's funny though This isn't a centrepiece of the debate ewerk, don't worry.

The Sun has theorised that they're going to be taken over by a Chinese consortium who will immediately sack Moyes and bring back Allardyce for the second coming, to finish the great and noble project he started last year.