OV9

duncs500 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 11:23 am

ZedLeg wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 10:38 am I’ve literally been figuring out if I could run for local council or something recently

Do it! Honestly, I might not be politically aligned to you but you're clearly passionate and well informed. I would rather have a discussion with someone like that, maybe see something from a different perspective, maybe learn something. That's also the kind of person I'd want on a ballot paper, as a minimum it allows us to see what kind of support there is out there for your policy opinions and may indirectly influence policy with enough support.

Politics is missing people who are not afraid to give genuine opinions, and the polarised nature of life at the moment means all any budding politician cares about is avoiding a social media 'call out' / 'pile on' for expressing the 'wrong' opinion whether that's a left or right viewpoint (once they have left the comfort of their particular echo chamber).

Realistically I don’t think I’d get anywhere but it’s something I’d like to at least try.

dinny_g wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 11:38 am

ZedLeg wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 11:09 am You’ve just described erosion of standards dinny, you didn’t vote for them because you thought Labour would do a better job but would vote for them as the best choice despite them not improving.

That’s how it happens.

I didn't vote for them because I hoped Labour would do a better job, not thought - and they still might.

I should point out that the last GE was a bit different, coming as it did after so many years of Conservative rule, Covid etc. Next time out, given the same inputs, I might choose not to vote, I may choose one party, maybe another, maybe a fringe candidate in my local constituency as they're locally sounding good etc.

So not as obvious a question as you first thought

Sorry Zed, I'm really not getting you to be honest.

The point of that question was to get the “you must vote” people to really evaluate what that means, which you belatedly did and concluded that you may not vote.

ZedLeg wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 11:37 am That’s all by design imo. They don’t want people politically engaged because they wouldn’t be able to get away with what they’re doing so easily.

They're really not that organised

ZedLeg wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2025 11:50 am The point of that question was to get the “you must vote” people to really evaluate what that means, which you belatedly did and concluded that you may not vote.

did I ???

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm I think in general, not voting is a perfectly valid use of your constitutional right but in this particular case, given what what everyone knew Trump was likely to do, I think more people should have voted for the lesser of the 2 evils.

Maybe I contradicted myself in this thread - wouldn't be a surprise, would it.. #BecauseDinny

Did I read this right about the helicopter & plan collision?

US President Donald Trump says he has been briefed on the "terrible accident" and questions why the helicopter didn't "go up or down"

Yes it looks like Trump is stating the bleeding obvious but to his defence, from what I'm reading the airplane was flying under normal air traffic control. The military plane was flying under 'see and avoid' and was told by air traffic control that there was an airplane nearby. So yeah, why didn't it go up or down is the question!

First fatal accident involving a US airline since 2009 apparently.

Right after his highness started a purge of federal employees, and froze funding for safety & oversight.

Have we got a deep state conspiracy theory yet, so that donold can go on TV and play victim ?

They’ve probably got one more “it was dei’s fault” before people catch on.

Is anyone watching his press conference??

He’s blaming Obama’s and Biden’s diversity policy for allowing people with mental health issues to be Air Traffic controllers

Seriously

Do I get a prize? Apart from this sense of creeping dread.

“So you’re saying have safety concerns about Air Travel”

“No we’ve the safest Air travel in the world”

“But then it’s not the controllers and DEI”

“Well it might be, we don’t know”

dinny_g wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 4:57 pm Is anyone watching his press conference??

He’s blaming Obama’s and Biden’s diversity policy for allowing people with mental health issues to be Air Traffic controllers

Seriously

About 43mins in. Wows.

dinny_g wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 4:57 pm Is anyone watching his press conference??

He’s blaming Obama’s and Biden’s diversity policy for allowing people with mental health issues to be Air Traffic controllers

Seriously

Now, Dinny - that's neither fair, nor accurate.

DEI isn't just used for people with mental health issues. It's used for anyone who isn't a cis white male, depending on the situation.

So with the california widfires, it wasn't mental illness - it was south asian bull dykes who don't know how to logistics a fire response good because, you know, can't see the screen with their slitty eyes and their obsession with carpet munching distracts them from sending tenders out, they were probably too busy trying to force themselves on an innocent straight girl, etc.

(I've not just made that up, I saw people posting bollocks like that - that last one had it pointed out to them by someone else that they were telling on themselves with their porn choices, too )

It's basically whatever they want to be a raging bigot about in that particular moment.

And with these cunts, it is pure bigotry, and just like if you see someone using "woke" in a """serious""" manner, anyone using "DEI" as a kneejerk response to anything should be immediately - and loudly - dismissed from the conversation.

Blimey, i heard it live earlier. it started ok - even quite statesmanly (obviously with the Trumpism off script biglys), but holy fuck did it change direction!

Probably more relevant to this incident than whether someone is <insert slur here> is that Trump and Musk have booted a good few senior people from the FAA and TSA since coming into office.

Also this:

The Trump administration also sent an email this week to 2.3 million federal employees from the Office of Personnel Management, which is now packed with Musk allies and loyalists, asking them to commit to the MAGA mission or accept a buyout.

Air traffic controllers were among the millions of government workers who received the email, which used similar language to a message sent to Twitter employees when Musk took over in fall 2022, even though the FAA has already been trying to manage a persistent shortage of those crucial aviation safety workers.

https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-2671032400/

It'd be impossible for a move like that to have not hit morale, and thus, staff performance and efficiency.

Tell a bunch of people they're basically on the line job wise, and see if they work as well as normal shortly afterwards. Maybe someone was distracted by the thought of being out of a job, and missed some important info?

Paraphrasing:

> So you've stated it's not clear that the air traffic controllers (or the helicopter pilot(s)) did anything wrong - so how do you determine that Democrat DE&I policies - hiring incompetent air traffic controllers - are the cause of the issue?

# Because I have common sense. Next question.

He knows about air traffic control, bigly.

So it’s all the fault of DEI policies in air traffic control, but it’s also all the fault of the helicopter crew, who have eyes and should have been able to see the plane and move.

He’s a fucking loon. And the bootlicking of every other member of that group was beyond cringe.

Surely no one can watch this and think that he’s come out well from it?!