After seven previous attempts to become an MP resulted in failure, Nigel Farage is hoping it will be eighth time lucky as he begins his first day of campaigning in Clacton, the Essex constituency and started the day washing milkshake out of his hair.
A woman drenched the Reform UK leader with a McDonald's banana milkshake as he came out of a pub and i cannot condone that sort of behaviour, a milkshake at McDonald's is almost £2 where you could make your own at home and take that along for a fraction of the price.
The Conservartives are obviously worried that as they have slipped so far along the ideological scale within a thrown fast food drink of Farage's awful right wing party, that they will lose voters to the newly created Reform UK and the signs are already that it is happening with the 11% poll rating they have amassed coming almost entirely from the Conservative voters side.
The Labour Party must be thinking it's Christmas come early because as the right wing vote splits, their lead over both parties is growing which will won't translate into more seats in the House of Commons for them but less seats for the opposition so a larger majority which doesn't seem to be a problem for Farage, who is saying he want Reform UK to replace the Tories as the natural home of the right wing and which is fine because it means neither will ever be able to muster enough to trouble the ruling Party.
That isn't necessarily a good thing, the last Labour Party was going great guns until Tony Blair teamed up with George W Bush and went on a war spree in the Middle East which saw Labour spend the next 14 years in the wilderness.
If Clacton decide they want Farage as their MP then good luck to them, not that i think he will win the seat but if he does he isn't going to be pottering around faffing about with local issues but there will be plenty of more milkshake's being hurled before then, hopefully cheaper ones because he really isn't worth wasting £2 on.
Thursday 6 June 2024
Farage: The MilkShake Kid
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
yeah w and blair had nothing to do so they started a war just for kicks... there was no threat of any sort to the uk or the us. nothing triggered the US and uk to take action except w and blair being bored... obama didn't see a problem either, he just created a surge for the fun of it...
just let the arab nations and muslim societies wipe out Israel, control the oil that europe needs for their economies, and control the trade routes to asia.
historically arab nations and the persians/iranians never were threats to europe right? ottomans, pffft?
I do wonder sometimes if you are just losing it so i restrain from arguing with you because it wouldn't be good to argue with someone with some form of mental degradation.
Then i think you are just trying to get a rise, saying any old nonsense to get a reaction because even you can't believe the gibberish you often spout.
Then i think how awful your understanding of most things are and put it down to that famous lack of grasp you have on situations.
I end up just assuming that your understanding is sadly no match for your eagerness to have a different opinion to me, regardless of how that makes you come across.
Has to be one of those, hopefully not the first one but i assume the final one.
the other possibility is that you are clueless... the most likely alternative.
how can one (you) claim to know nothing about economics, statistics, AI, finance, commerce, history, and then claim to be correct about their views of the world based on the "experts" they ascribe to follow?
if one (you) only understand rock-n-roll, how do you know the experts you worship are the smart experts?
So if you don't know something do you not go and ask someone who does (an expert) or do you guess or just stay ignorant?
i do three things.
1. consume what the experts say,
2. educate myself in the space so i can validate the methods they use. that is why i have multiple degrees and dozens of professional certifications...
3. i do not dismiss the doubts of legitimate dissenters because they are in the minority
‘that is why i have multiple degrees and dozens of professional certifications’. Oh dear… there’s that ‘thing’ again.
no, there you go again acting like when i express my competence it is an indication that there is something wrong with me, WHEN IT IS REALLY YOU JUST DISMISSING YOUR IGNORANCE...
btw, the people you blindly believe call themselves Dr. and put PhD on their titles. So could I dodge your lame redirection by instead being like a PhD and using a signature like this:
Graduate Smith, MS DA, MBA, MS National Intelligence, Certified Competitive Intelligence, Certified VC, Certified Innovation, Certified LSS, Certified PMP, Certified ML, Certified Futurist, Certified Designer
no, you would still say i'm not qualified and have to should all my qualifications to cover all my weaknesses...
To be honest I would say something about your desperation to mention your CV and qualifications at every opportunity smells of insecurity and then quote some philosopher saying something along the lines of a man who thinks he is clever constantly boasts of it but a man who knows he is clever doesn’t need to. You obviously feel you need to.
there was an era where, when i presented you with challenges using logic and data, and you weren't able to respond with credible explanations. so, you shifted to "i'm quoting experts". a lame leftist, journalist standard response, trying to use third party credibility. you rarely knew, and still rarely know what the hell you are talking about unless it is that crappy era of punk rock.
that approach, being so lame that even you knew it was inane, led you to quickly shift to attacking my lack of qualifications (typical journalist - attack the person not the topic). my response was to share my qualifications. which is funny because you were attacking my qualifications, while at the same time you were completely lacking in qualifications yourself, per your own words... that ol leftist double standard.
since i am qualified (certainly when compared to you) you shifted to different personal attack, "oh, q must be insecure". i see if for what it is. and you know it too. you don't have ground to stand on so you attack me. not the data and logic i offer. i get it. you are insecure for good reason. it must either be hell to be that ignorant on so many topics, or complete bliss as the old saying goes, "ignorance is bliss".
never let data and logic get in your way lucyp. just keep on blasting out ignorant, misleading posts with bluster and pomposity... and be sure an tell people you don't understand anything you are posting, but you are quoting experts... brilliant
So Quentin Smith, i never mentioned your qualifications until you began weirdly dropping them into the conversation and i began making fun of you for it, i have said a few times it was your poor grasp of events that you fell down on, if you took that as attacking your lack of qualifications then that's on you.
Journalists tackle every area imaginable, obviously we have to rely on experts for advice and guidance or do you propose we learn everything about every subject matter? Really?
If you don't see how desperately trying to 'prove yourself' to someone by constantly mentioning your qualifications, someone you have never met, will never meet and lives thousands of miles away and has no effect on your life isn't you being insecure then i suggest you sign up with a good therapist because that is text book 'insecurity'.
ha ha, advice to see a therapist from a leftist journalist... what a hoot...
the first thing you attacked was my credentials... all the way back in 2006 or 2007. i don't remember exactly. but here is what i do remember.
- as you note above, you know little or nothing about the topics you report
- so you just quote others that say what you like and you call them experts (no disputation)
so, when i challenged with legit data and question, you said i wasn't qualified... when i challenged with the opinions you reported by referencing different experts, you then attacked their credibility.
is that what you think journalism is?
- publish a biased viewpoint
- then attack the credibility of those that challenge your bias, instead of the data and logic
- then attack the credibility of experts that don't align with your bias
by the way, fyi, that is not how "the science" works. experts don't attack other experts in "the science", they attack the data and logic... of course, professional journalists have done a good job at damaging the credibility of scientists...
The fact that you don't ask anyone if you don't know something speaks volumes and explains everything.
I never mentioned your qualifications, that's your excuse to weirdly try and shoehorn your qualifications in at every opportunity.
As for the therapist, that's your call and if you don't think its a problem then fill yer boots but i will continue to mock you for being really, really bad at understanding things.
where did i say "i don't ask anyone if i don't know"? i didn't say that. i ask lots of questions, and i often admit when i don't know something.
i believe everybody has a right to ask any question or state any opinion regardless of qualification. no matter how stupid their opinion might be.
i also believe it is okay to call out people that opine stupid crap, and i call them out when they can't correctly answer questions about a topic. in other words, i'm okay with people being stupid, but i'm not okay with them insisting they are correct when they can't explain why they are correct.
if you want to say the moon is made of bleu cheese, fine, or if you want to say you are quoting an expert, fine, but i won't let you act as if that is correct...
Post a Comment