US Election

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Who will win?..

  • Total voters
    60
Status
Not open for further replies.
FosseFilberto said:
... because you want it to ... does she scream, spin around indignantly, run away in tears? None of these ... that his hand moves towards an area of her body that she may not be comfortable with is valid ... but it does not prove in any way that she thinks he is doing that with purposeful intent ... isn't he a doddery old man? the right seem to think so most of the time ... perhaps she just moves away to prevent there being any embarrassment?... smart kid.
Click to expand...
If you move your hand around long enough in a bucket of **** you might find a nugget.
 
Tobes said:
You should really retract that comment.
Click to expand...
Well like Starmer a well know *****phile appeaser Archy seems to be going out of his way to defend an ageing and serial kiddy fiddler. But no offence personally Archy probably could have phrased it better.
 
The Ginger Marks said:
Well like Starmer a well know *****phile appeaser Archy seems to be going out of his way to defend an ageing and serial kiddy fiddler. But no offence personally Archy probably could have phrased it better.
Click to expand...

The first part is fabricated ****e, the second part is not a retraction, merely sarcasm. Have another go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Number 1 Jasper, remembercolinlee, Ivan Dobsky and 1 other person
Tobes said:
The Senate you say....

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/senate/
Click to expand...

It's really not that hard is it. I've seen that before. Of course it's just polling atm and all about predictions but the weight of reporting suggests there's a far greater chance of Democrats making net gains.

How anyone can then claim they expect zero Republican Senate seats lost but more likely Democratic seats will be, all based on some ITK youtubers, fck only knows!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tobes
I think some are on here long enough to know that there's a few on here that do not argue in good faith. Those same few will also lie about what was said and not said, what was meant and claimed, as they always do. Anyone can just read what I say and what is said in reply.



I got me ignore on, but I bet the hugbox is in full swing.
You must log in or register to see images



Keep those smiles on lads, I'll leave ye to your thread and chronic TDS
You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tiddler
The Ginger Marks said:
Well like Starmer a well know *****phile appeaser Archy seems to be going out of his way to defend an ageing and serial kiddy fiddler. But no offence personally Archy probably could have phrased it better.
Click to expand...

That's bollox and I suspect you know it ... you are not appeasing *****philes when as the DPP you tell the CPS that they don't have a strong enough case for a conviction ... you are doing your job and sending them back to do theirs ... not to do so might have meant Saville never getting convicted as double jeopardy was still in force at that point ...

Sure enough Saville did have friends in high places ... but not Kier Starmer ...

You must log in or register to see images
 
  • Like
Reactions: remembercolinlee, Ivan Dobsky and Tobes
O'l Gravy Leg. said:
I think some are on here long enough to know that there's a few on here that do not argue in good faith. Those same few will also lie about what was said and not said, what was meant and claimed, as they always do. Anyone can just read what I say and what is said in reply.



I got me ignore on, but I bet the hugbox is in full swing.
You must log in or register to see images



Keep those smiles on lads, I'll leave ye to your thread and chronic TDS
You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...
Always the same with you, as all that’s happened here is that you’ve been pulled up on what you’ve posted and questioned as to validity of the evidence that’s lead you to your position.

Then you’ve launched into ad hominem and are trying to suggest people aren’t discussing the subject ‘in good faith’ whatever that’s supposed to mean. Opinions are like arseholes, but when you suggest an opinion has a basis in fact then you can’t chuck the teddy when people ask what that basis actually is. Nor can you cry foul when information is supplied that challenges the validity of your assertion.

You’re welcome.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ivan Dobsky
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back