You think?
This began with a call to stop checking info, stats and background. And to ‘Use your own grey matter and not somebody else’s.’
I guess that could be ok if the desire is simply general banter and no more than that. However when claims are made that are easily and provably false then is it not reasonable to pause, have a think, do a check to find the correction, and share the correction?
Me sharing that perspective led to ‘it’s not always possible to conjure up the source of the information, but that doesn’t mean it was Joe down the pub, or that it’s not valid’. Which fair but also means, if its valid, that it can stand up to scrutiny if someone has a different insight. Which when this was explained led to ‘that is what most “common” folks elect a government on so, it must be a relevant perspective!’
Now that is evidently confusing the validity of some idea being based on the numbers who think that as opposed to the correctness or justification. Which is, shall we say, daft. Which I highlighted.
I then reflected that this whole chat began with that opening suggestion that I stop doing fact checking and, by implication, stop correcting some erroneous posts. That looks a lot like censorship, were I to adhere to that request. If its not censorship then what is it?
Rather than put words in someone’s mouth what I did was repeat their posts using more forthright language. To make their point, and the implications, even clearer.
Nobody said you had to stop checking facts Lincs, but it’s getting so tedious of late.
People don’t necessarily post to get a good fact checking, they post because it’s their opinion derived from something they’ve seen on the news or read. It’s all about trust, I don’t think we need to check every detail of every post from people who disagree with you. We must trust that people didn’t just make stuff up to annoy you. They honestly must believe what they posted and that’s usually good enough for me.
Having to justify every claim or comment with statistics and facts from google is fine, but it generally steers the thread well away from it’s original topic heading and gets a bit boring and you end up with two people fighting it out for the last word.
^^^ What he said.
If I want a Socratean debate, I’ll find somewhere and someone who knows what that entails, which isn’t supposition and assumptions of what the other person thinks.
Which is entirely different from simple inane analities based on bias and ego.
‘they post because it’s their opinion derived from something they’ve seen on the news or read’
I’m sure you are right but I’d also add they repeat stuff they’ve heard and think its most likely correct - because it fits in with their existing beliefs. My checking and challenging is because I find this repeating of an error really quite annoying. Why should I let it pass and let it continue? There is certainly no intention to annoy me but unwittingly repeating something plain wrong should annoy everyone. If a post is fair, justified and not blatently wrong then no-one, least of all me, is going to fact check it. But I understand your point. I’ll wind my neck in. You can safely go on thinking that Putin was 110% right to invade Ukraine.
And thank you for clarifying that your interest in stopping me fact checking is not about censorship. It is simply about your unwillingness and low interest in seeing false claims corrected. Its about keeping everyone entertained. I’m confident that posts full of unsubstantiated false claims will keep everyone entertained.
Pompous.
Anyway, let’s get back to Farage who has managed to get himself into another one of his self-made holes. First he says that he did not attend the budget in parliament because he was the victim of a ruck in Westminster a bit back. He claimed a pack of aggressive Libdem MP’s gave him a hard time and pushed him about. (Everyone should have wondered about the likelihood of that. Its rare to the words aggressive and libem in the same sentence.)
Then it turns out that the incident a bit back was Farage himself pushing a Libdem MP out of the way. He was the aggressor against this woman MP. Oh, Nigel, if you are going to lie try not to make one that leads straight back to your own terrible behaviour.
Care to provide evidence about those claims, since both Reform and LibDems are saying it’s the other side that did it. The video clip from the Telegraph shows no such argy bargy, and the LibDems claim it happened before the start of the clip.
So, without evidence, it remains allegatory from both sides.
I would prefer to adhere to our new regime of no fact checking or online searches for verifications. My post stands. And it is foolish to believe the Telegraph on such matters; they have a history of poor reporting and mispresentations. No, the fact is that Farage is a coarse bully and misogynist. Fact.
The video is readily available.
He may, or may not be those things. But without evidence, it just comes down to your wilful bias.
Which, in all likelihood, indicates that all of your arguments are based on bigotry and hearsay.
So, all in all, I think we’re done on this.
So if I do not dig out evidence I am bigotted and if I do then I am too pedantic and boring.
You guys need to sort out which approach you want me follow.
You also need to specify in which way I am guilty of bigotry. Just because I am certain that Farage is a crook and the worst sort of person, and that the right wing tend to be heartless opportunists only out to protect their wealth does not mean that I am a bigot. Just someone of empathy and common sense.
I think it’s common knowledge that Farage and Reform have done no favours for those who can afford to live in a barn conversion out in a quiet country region of a foreign country.
So I can quite understand your vitriol concerning Farage.
As Einstein once said…“For every action (or fact or news item) there is an equal and opposite reaction” (an opposite fact or news item)
So are dredged up facts and statistics really are to be believed…Depends who financed the research.
They are all at it to differing degrees 
Dodging real work 
I find it quite astonishing that some people talk about Farage being PM of a Reform government as if it’s a reality.
I would bet my house on it never happening.
Don’t tempt fate! 
If the fear of him/reform gets the main two parties to do something about the issues that’s making him popular, then that would be useful for them and also show that they are interested in the electorate’s views.
I bet you would have bet your house on the brexit vote would have been to stay in Helen…
The media certainly would have and there would have been a lot of homeless journalists now.
Cameron deffo betted against Brexit being voted.
And look what he lost…Cameron who?
I think you will find that was Newton not Einstein