Discussion:
Racist street signs?
Add Reply
Willy Nilly
2020-11-09 22:18:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.

The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Rich80105
2020-11-09 23:18:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
Willy Nilly
2020-11-10 00:07:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Rich80105
2020-11-10 00:58:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Tony
2020-11-10 01:26:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Rich80105
2020-11-10 04:14:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
Tony
2020-11-10 04:17:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
Well there are none that you described here.
Rich80105
2020-11-10 10:17:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 22:17:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
Well there are none that you described here.
The evidence suggests otherwise, but you are entitled to express your
unsupported opinion.
Tony
2020-11-10 19:47:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 22:17:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
Well there are none that you described here.
The evidence suggests otherwise, but you are entitled to express your
unsupported opinion.
As are you ("the evidence" is not provided by you as usual).
John Bowes
2020-11-10 05:37:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Rich80105
2020-11-10 10:20:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
Tony
2020-11-10 19:49:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
Rich80105
2020-11-11 02:07:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
Tony
2020-11-11 02:48:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Rich80105
2020-11-11 03:16:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
Tony
2020-11-11 04:45:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
John Bowes
2020-11-11 05:17:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
Polls are like many of Richie's posts. Pointless and bloody useless :)
Post by Tony
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
You're dreaming Tony. Rich isn't liable to do either. He's to bloody stupid to understand he's like the government: useless!
George
2020-11-11 19:04:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600
Post by Tony
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and
the National party, you have totally failed to make that connection.
Just another nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people like you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than
by a tiny minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
There is no similarity between US and NZ politics.
The US is a United States and not one country..
Oh and polls dont mean anything as proven by their constant failure.
He's not the brightest candle in the pack is he
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Rich80105
2020-11-11 20:22:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
John Bowes
2020-11-11 20:45:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
As expected you attack National supporters because they don't follow your support of Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and some of the worst monsters in political history!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Marxists/ Despots are autocratic Rich. Shit ardern could give lessons in autocracy in her Mummy voice like she did during lock down!
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
Unlike you Rich he does...... Besides it was only a silly suggestion because it highlighted your own bloody stupidity and bias!
Tony
2020-11-12 00:44:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
James Christophers
2020-11-12 01:27:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion as put.
Tony
2020-11-12 01:39:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not appropriate in
this context.
James Christophers
2020-11-12 02:05:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not appropriate in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.

If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Tony
2020-11-12 03:21:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely
of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than
by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not appropriate in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses
the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal
converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless
informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.
If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly
others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Whether they do or not is entirely up to them. I do not solicit that support.
Your pedantry is merely a differnt opinion to mine.
James Christophers
2020-11-12 04:06:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you
disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth
gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a
number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20%
of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely
of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than
by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not appropriate in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses
the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal
converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless
informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.
If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly
others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Whether they do or not is entirely up to them.
I do not solicit that support.
Bully for you!
Post by Tony
Your pedantry is merely a differnt opinion to mine.
Within the context of Rich's informally phrased remark whose implicit meaning is unmistakable, offering a further elucidation that goes beyond the linguistic confines of the OED or any other authority can be neither pedantry nor opinion.
Tony
2020-11-12 05:44:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at
orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
(Willy
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it
worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake
news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took
quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information
very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other
countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes
to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you
disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth
gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a
number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a
news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to
20%
of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely
of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than
by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are
superfluous
or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not
appropriate
in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses
the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal
converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless
informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.
If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly
others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Whether they do or not is entirely up to them.
I do not solicit that support.
Bully for you!
Post by Tony
Your pedantry is merely a differnt opinion to mine.
Within the context of Rich's informally phrased remark whose implicit meaning
is unmistakable, offering a further elucidation that goes beyond the linguistic
confines of the OED or any other authority can be neither pedantry nor opinion.
It can be either and in fact it can be both.
But in fact I was referring to your pedantry.
Rich80105
2020-11-12 09:28:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 23:44:28 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at
orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
(Willy
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it
worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake
news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took
quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information
very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other
countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes
to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you
disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth
gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a
number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a
news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to
20%
of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely
of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than
by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are
superfluous
or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not
appropriate
in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses
the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal
converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless
informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.
If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly
others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Whether they do or not is entirely up to them.
I do not solicit that support.
Bully for you!
Post by Tony
Your pedantry is merely a differnt opinion to mine.
Within the context of Rich's informally phrased remark whose implicit meaning
is unmistakable, offering a further elucidation that goes beyond the linguistic
confines of the OED or any other authority can be neither pedantry nor opinion.
It can be either and in fact it can be both.
But in fact I was referring to your pedantry.
I suspect you find such diversions from the Subject of the thread much
easier than thinking about applying the views you wish to impose on
others, to your own unsupported opinions, Tony.
John Bowes
2020-11-12 20:17:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 23:44:28 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at
orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
(Willy
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it
worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake
news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took
quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information
very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other
countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes
to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you
disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth
gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a
number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a
news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to
20%
of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so
rarely
of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that
Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a
number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and
the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection.
Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other
than
by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did
not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the
suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are
superfluous
or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not
appropriate
in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses
the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal
converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless
informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.
If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly
others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Whether they do or not is entirely up to them.
I do not solicit that support.
Bully for you!
Post by Tony
Your pedantry is merely a differnt opinion to mine.
Within the context of Rich's informally phrased remark whose implicit meaning
is unmistakable, offering a further elucidation that goes beyond the linguistic
confines of the OED or any other authority can be neither pedantry nor opinion.
It can be either and in fact it can be both.
But in fact I was referring to your pedantry.
I suspect you find such diversions from the Subject of the thread much
easier than thinking about applying the views you wish to impose on
others, to your own unsupported opinions, Tony.
Typical Rich! Garbage and stupid bloody condescension from a comprehensionless communist supporter!
Tony
2020-11-12 20:33:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 23:44:28 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 22:45:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13,
Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at
orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
(Willy
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only
street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to
display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and
overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the
article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it
worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake
news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic
at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but
he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took
quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance -
in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it
was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information
very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other
countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right
Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes
to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you
disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on
earth
gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a
number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a
news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to
20%
of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence
to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so
rarely
of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that
Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a
number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump
and
the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
Read above again, Tony. I did not imply any such link with the
National Party, just that a majority of those New Zealanders who
wanted Trump to win were supporters of that party.
You are not that naive, your meaning was abundantly clear.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than
by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
A minority of 10% or possibly more is hardly a tiny minority, and I
suspect not all marxists are autocratic, but the item on radio did not
mention any other group that supporters of National.
Post by Tony
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Perhaps you could take your own advice . . .
No, you provide evidence or proof. You have so far failed to do so.
Post by Tony
Where is this mythical 10% figure for example?
Your repetitive use of ellipses is silly.
In this instance not silly but appropriate, being a routine conversational
device that politely invites the recipient to think further on the suggestion
as put.
"the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are
superfluous
or
able to be understood from contextual clues" and therefore not
appropriate
in
this context.
Quite so, but the raher less determinedly pedantic will observe that Rich uses
the device in a forum where the written word takes the place of informal
converstational speech which, you, he and I know is replete with the countless
informalities that characterise written-as-spoken discourse.
If you would insist otherwise, then doubtless Rich, and quite possibnly
others, will be only too anxious to support your view.
Whether they do or not is entirely up to them.
I do not solicit that support.
Bully for you!
Post by Tony
Your pedantry is merely a differnt opinion to mine.
Within the context of Rich's informally phrased remark whose implicit meaning
is unmistakable, offering a further elucidation that goes beyond the linguistic
confines of the OED or any other authority can be neither pedantry nor opinion.
It can be either and in fact it can be both.
But in fact I was referring to your pedantry.
I suspect you find such diversions from the Subject of the thread much
easier than thinking about applying the views you wish to impose on
others, to your own unsupported opinions, Tony.
I addressed exactly the distraction that Keith Warren made. He went off topic
as often he does.
You post more unsupported opinions here than the rest of the contributors
combined.
James Christophers
2020-11-13 01:59:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.

In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is twofold: greed and fear.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Tony
2020-11-13 02:56:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 03:20:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Tony
2020-11-13 04:35:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
What an idiotic question Rich, why don't you try to debate and stop abusing
people?
Your interminable and uneducated use of an ellipsis is noted once more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 07:53:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:35:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
What an idiotic question Rich, why don't you try to debate and stop abusing
people?
Not my fault that you cannot explain your own words, Tony.
Post by Tony
Your interminable and uneducated use of an ellipsis is noted once more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
John Bowes
2020-11-13 09:15:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:35:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same
polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
What an idiotic question Rich, why don't you try to debate and stop abusing
people?
Not my fault that you cannot explain your own words, Tony.
Post by Tony
Your interminable and uneducated use of an ellipsis is noted once more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Bullshit! Once again you are let down by your total lack of comprehension Rich.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 21:05:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 01:15:20 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:35:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same
polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
What an idiotic question Rich, why don't you try to debate and stop abusing
people?
Not my fault that you cannot explain your own words, Tony.
Post by Tony
Your interminable and uneducated use of an ellipsis is noted once more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Bullshit! Once again you are let down by your total lack of comprehension Rich.
You appear to be responding to a comment from Tony - perhaps you are a
little confused, John.
John Bowes
2020-11-13 21:17:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 01:15:20 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:35:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same
polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance
because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does
any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one
way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing
policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
What an idiotic question Rich, why don't you try to debate and stop abusing
people?
Not my fault that you cannot explain your own words, Tony.
Post by Tony
Your interminable and uneducated use of an ellipsis is noted once more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
Bullshit! Once again you are let down by your total lack of comprehension Rich.
You appear to be responding to a comment from Tony - perhaps you are a
little confused, John.
Wrong! YOU are showing your lack of comprehension Rich. A common fault with you!
Tony
2020-11-13 19:27:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:35:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:56:59 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite
a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as
does
any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment
one
way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
What important decision did you have in mind, Tony? It is a fact
that sentiment can cause movements in share prices . . .
What an idiotic question Rich, why don't you try to debate and stop abusing
people?
Not my fault that you cannot explain your own words, Tony.
What is your fault is that you are lying and twisting other people's words.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Your interminable and uneducated use of an ellipsis is noted once more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Provide evidence of your silly suggestion or go away and sulk.
James Christophers
2020-11-13 04:17:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of it too, don't you?

Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are made.
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Tony
2020-11-13 04:32:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
made.
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
James Christophers
2020-11-13 23:38:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
made.
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
As I have shown, the evidence is irrefutably otherwise, and you know it. All you have left to you you is your obduracy in the face of fact-borne evidence - childish foot-stamping of the intellectually stunted whose only recourse when on the back foot is to try to browbeat and dominate the discourse. And you do a lot of it, too, don't you?
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
Rich80105
2020-11-14 02:15:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
made.
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
As I have shown, the evidence is irrefutably otherwise, and you know it. All you have left to you you is your obduracy in the face of fact-borne evidence - childish foot-stamping of the intellectually stunted whose only recourse when on the back foot is to try to browbeat and dominate the discourse. And you do a lot of it, too, don't you?
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.

As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
which is I think the study referred to by RNZ:

https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424

from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
least two of the contributors to this thread:

"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.

Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us” (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powers” (35.5%).

Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.

Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.

And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical” approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
James Christophers
2020-11-14 03:11:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance
because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does
any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one
way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing
policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
made.
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
As I have shown, the evidence is irrefutably otherwise, and you know it. All you have left to you you is your obduracy in the face of fact-borne evidence - childish foot-stamping of the intellectually stunted whose only recourse when on the back foot is to try to browbeat and dominate the discourse. And you do a lot of it, too, don't you?
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents. Isms have always been an active and signifcant component within any society, containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life. What is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded.

(snipped)
Rich80105
2020-11-14 04:20:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:11:56 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of
the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same
polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance
because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as does
any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment one
way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing
policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
made.
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
As I have shown, the evidence is irrefutably otherwise, and you know it. All you have left to you you is your obduracy in the face of fact-borne evidence - childish foot-stamping of the intellectually stunted whose only recourse when on the back foot is to try to browbeat and dominate the discourse. And you do a lot of it, too, don't you?
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just
another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents. Isms have always been an active and signifcant component within any society, containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life. What is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded.
All of which somewhat contradicts your previous statement that: "There
is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). "
Certainly there are not millions of New Zealanders who hold the views
ascribed to those that support Trump - in fact your attempt at
deflection, including snipping of conclusions you appear to find
unpalatable, perhaps indicate that you could also be part of that
group so well described . . . it must be difficult for the
unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded to be
faced with evidence of their inclusion in the group of Kiwi Trumpers .
. .
Post by James Christophers
(snipped)
Tony
2020-11-14 04:36:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:11:56 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
deleted for brevity
Post by Rich80105
Post by James Christophers
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents. Isms
have always been an active and signifcant component within any society,
containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form
both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed
village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other
way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since
they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life. What
is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible
and the institutionally lazy-minded.
All of which somewhat contradicts your previous statement that: "There
is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). "
Certainly there are not millions of New Zealanders who hold the views
ascribed to those that support Trump - in fact your attempt at
deflection, including snipping of conclusions you appear to find
unpalatable, perhaps indicate that you could also be part of that
group so well described . . . it must be difficult for the
unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded to be
faced with evidence of their inclusion in the group of Kiwi Trumpers .
. .
Post by James Christophers
(snipped)
Well done you got Keith to a "t".
Rich80105
2020-11-14 09:19:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:36:54 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:11:56 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
deleted for brevity
Post by Rich80105
Post by James Christophers
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents. Isms
have always been an active and signifcant component within any society,
containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form
both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed
village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other
way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since
they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life. What
is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible
and the institutionally lazy-minded.
All of which somewhat contradicts your previous statement that: "There
is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). "
Certainly there are not millions of New Zealanders who hold the views
ascribed to those that support Trump - in fact your attempt at
deflection, including snipping of conclusions you appear to find
unpalatable, perhaps indicate that you could also be part of that
group so well described . . . it must be difficult for the
unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded to be
faced with evidence of their inclusion in the group of Kiwi Trumpers .
. .
Post by James Christophers
(snipped)
Well done you got Keith to a "t".
Rich80105
2020-11-14 09:26:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:36:54 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:11:56 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
deleted for brevity
Post by Rich80105
Post by James Christophers
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents. Isms
have always been an active and signifcant component within any society,
containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form
both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed
village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other
way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since
they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life. What
is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible
and the institutionally lazy-minded.
All of which somewhat contradicts your previous statement that: "There
is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). "
Certainly there are not millions of New Zealanders who hold the views
ascribed to those that support Trump - in fact your attempt at
deflection, including snipping of conclusions you appear to find
unpalatable, perhaps indicate that you could also be part of that
group so well described . . . it must be difficult for the
unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded to be
faced with evidence of their inclusion in the group of Kiwi Trumpers .
. .
Post by James Christophers
(snipped)
Well done you got Keith to a "t".
Your further deliberate snipping aside, I was clearly not referring to
James Christophers - it was you Tony that said "There is no worthwhile
suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny minority
(maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). " - and I was
clearly responding to that comment. I have not seen any post from a
"Keith."

Your dishonesty is manifest, Tony, and you appear to be emulating
Trump in descending into a bitter and twisted madness arising from an
ongoing inability to cope with reality.
I have not seen a post from Keith
Tony
2020-11-14 19:50:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:36:54 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 19:11:56 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
deleted for brevity
Post by Rich80105
Post by James Christophers
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents.
Isms
have always been an active and signifcant component within any society,
containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form
both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed
village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other
way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since
they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life.
What
is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible
and the institutionally lazy-minded.
All of which somewhat contradicts your previous statement that: "There
is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a
tiny minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). "
Certainly there are not millions of New Zealanders who hold the views
ascribed to those that support Trump - in fact your attempt at
deflection, including snipping of conclusions you appear to find
unpalatable, perhaps indicate that you could also be part of that
group so well described . . . it must be difficult for the
unreasoning suggestible and the institutionally lazy-minded to be
faced with evidence of their inclusion in the group of Kiwi Trumpers .
. .
Post by James Christophers
(snipped)
Well done you got Keith to a "t".
Your further deliberate snipping aside, I was clearly not referring to
James Christophers - it was you Tony that said "There is no worthwhile
suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by a tiny minority
(maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?). " - and I was
clearly responding to that comment. I have not seen any post from a
"Keith."
Your dishonesty is manifest, Tony, and you appear to be emulating
Trump in descending into a bitter and twisted madness arising from an
ongoing inability to cope with reality.
I have not seen a post from Keith
Yes you have, you have seen many. That is the real name of James Christophers
and a few other nyms he has used (perhaps still does). You are the only person
in tghis newsgroup that denies it, even James himself does not deny it
(actually he can't truthfully). Whatever name he uses the post is still from
him (Keith Warren).
I snipped for brevity because you have taken this topic way off course. You are
the dishonest one here and qll know it.
Tony
2020-11-14 04:35:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
James Christophers <***@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, 14 November 2020 at 15:16:04 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
deleted for brevity
Post by James Christophers
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words
which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the
face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the
term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe
and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
For every ism there are tens if not millions of like-minded adherents. Isms
have always been an active and signifcant component within any society,
containing as it does powerful elements of cohesion and tribalism that form
both the bedrock and raison-d'être of politicking at all levels, from hayseed
village gossip to high-flown parliamentary rhetoric. It can never be any other
way which is why I tend to ignore polls of the kind you identify here since
they can do more than confirm what amounts to an immutable fact of life. What
is worse, though, is that they do the thinking for the unreasoning suggestible
and the institutionally lazy-minded.
(snipped)
You are being unfair to Rich, he really does try to think it ois not
lazy-mindedness but simple dumb-wittedness.
Tony
2020-11-14 04:33:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us” (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powers” (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical” approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
Rich80105
2020-11-14 09:14:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us” (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powers” (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical” approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
Also from the article:
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."

I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.

It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
Tony
2020-11-14 19:52:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us” (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powers” (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical” approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times. What
you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and therefore of no
value. There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested. You are a disgrace.
James Christophers
2020-11-14 21:45:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us” (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powers” (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical” approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather a lot of it, don't you?

Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists, political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is, indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll has value in its own right.

Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word, however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.


You are a disgrace.


You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
Tony
2020-11-14 22:33:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us” (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powers” (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical” approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed to do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
Rich80105
2020-11-15 01:37:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control usâ€? (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powersâ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical� approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed to do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
provided - from that article:
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).

Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."

You may apologise now, Tony.
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
Tony
2020-11-15 03:58:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control usâ€? (11%) or “a biological weapon created
by one of the world’s super-powersâ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical� approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed to do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
Rich80105
2020-11-15 04:15:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control usâ€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powersâ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical� approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught out again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed to do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
You haven't held anyone to account, Tony, so it is you that is lying.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
Tony
2020-11-15 04:47:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control usâ€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powersâ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a “cautious
and sceptical� approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
You haven't held anyone to account, Tony, so it is you that is lying.
Only you on many occasions far too numerous to count.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
John Bowes
2020-11-15 06:50:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control us�€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powers�€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical�€? approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
You haven't held anyone to account, Tony, so it is you that is lying.
Only you on many occasions far too numerous to count.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
Give up Tony. Once again a thread has degenerated into you lie I'm perfect litany of lies from Rich and his mate Keith. Not worth trying to talk sense to the senseless and senile.....
Rich80105
2020-11-15 08:17:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of shadowy
forces that want to control usâ€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powersâ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical� approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
You haven't held anyone to account, Tony, so it is you that is lying.
Only you on many occasions far too numerous to count.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
John Bowes
2020-11-15 11:51:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control us�€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powers�€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical�€? approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the context of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then, the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way) failure and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
You haven't held anyone to account, Tony, so it is you that is lying.
Only you on many occasions far too numerous to count.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
Shame on you Rich for claiming you weren't trying to put National down. Why else did you post the article if it wasn't just another attempt at trolling the ng!
Tony
2020-11-15 19:20:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control usâ€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powersâ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements. And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical� approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more. Of course your intent was clear to all of us. You
are a disgrace.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
You may apologise now, Tony.
For holding you to account - never. You lie on lie on lie.
You haven't held anyone to account, Tony, so it is you that is lying.
Only you on many occasions far too numerous to count.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
You are a disgrace.
You are, by your own hand, self-evidently no different, so shame on you for
your blatant duplicitous hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy is yours as all know, you are unable to debate, and are always
right. Pathetic really.
James Christophers
2020-11-15 20:56:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong
is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to
search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but that
is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not
able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following
link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories
about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control us�€? (11%) or “a biological weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powers�€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements.
And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the
economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical�€? approach to climate change, compared with 23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the pathology of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every time you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of others, you identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.

You are capable of better. Much better.
Tony
2020-11-15 23:53:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being wrong
is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to
search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but
that
is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not
able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are
not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following
link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe
at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories
about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control usᅵ€? (11%) or “a biological
weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powersᅵ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements.
And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the
economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and scepticalᅵ€? approach to climate change, compared with
23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact** that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the
pathology
of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every
time
you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of others, you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Rich80105
2020-11-16 04:51:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:53:52 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being
wrong
is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to
search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but
that
is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was not
able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are
not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the following
link
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to describe
at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented, and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy theories
about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control us�€? (11%) or “a biological
weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powers�€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those statements.
And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the
economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical�€? approach to climate change, compared with
23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been
caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said
they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the
survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to you -
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several
times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to
psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact**
that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the
pathology
of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every
time
you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of others, you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Tony
2020-11-16 05:34:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:53:52 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being
wrong
is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to
search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of
a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in
my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is
some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but
that
is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was
not
able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are
not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the
following
link
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to
describe
at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented,
and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New
Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy
theories
about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control usᅵ€? (11%) or “a biological
weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powersᅵ€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those
statements.
And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New
Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the
economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and scepticalᅵ€? approach to climate change, compared with
23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been
caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said
they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the
survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to
you
-
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several
times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to
psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact**
that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the
pathology
of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last
word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every
time
you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of others, you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
Rich80105
2020-11-16 10:06:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:53:52 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being
wrong
is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to
search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of
a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in
my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is
some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but
that
is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was
not
able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are
not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the
following
link
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to
describe
at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented,
and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New
Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy
theories
about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control us�€? (11%) or “a biological
weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powers�€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those
statements.
And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New
Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the
economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical�€? approach to climate change, compared with
23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been
caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped
Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said
they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the
survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to
you
-
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several
times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll
and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You
do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to
psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a **fact**
that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such, then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the
pathology
of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last
word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all
its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every
time
you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting
evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has
failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of others, you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
John Bowes
2020-11-16 12:46:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 17:53:52 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 22:47:34 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 21:58:01 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sat, 14 Nov 2020 16:33:42 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 22:33:00 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:38:30 -0800 (PST), James Christophers
Deleted for brevity.
Post by Rich80105
I suspect at times that Tony merely criticises for the sake of
criticism - and when called on his criticism actually being
wrong
is
likely to say it was just an opinion. I took the time today to
search
for ellipsis, and can confirm that the use of it in "Birds of
a
feather... : is absolutely correct, both grammatically and in
my
opinion correctly applied to Tony. I did find that there is
some
disagreement as to whether it should be "..." or ". . .", but
that
is
relatively minor - both appear to be used and widely accepted.
As to the issue of Trumpism in New Zealand generally, I was
not
able
ot find the radio report that I referred to - RNZ podcasts are
not
easily searched for such content - but I did find the
following
link
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
from which I found this of interest - it does appear to
describe
at
"In general, Kiwi Trumpers see society as more discontented,
and
politicians as less trustworthy, than the average New
Zealander.
Some 47.5% of the Trump supporters endorsed conspiracy
theories
about
the COVID-19 virus. For them, it was either “an invention of
shadowy
forces that want to control us�€? (11%) or “a biological
weapon
created
by one of the world’s super-powers�€? (35.5%).
Only 7.7% of Trump opponents ticked either of those
statements.
And,
overall, 85.8% of the sample agreed that the virus came from a
natural
source.
Moreover, only 11.7% of Trump supporters agreed the New
Zealand
government was taking the right approach to dealing with the
economic
impact of COVID-19, while 62% of Trump opponents agreed.
And 84% of the Kiwi Trumpers preferred the government take a
“cautious
and sceptical�€? approach to climate change, compared with
23.8% of
opponents."
Absolutely not what you posted - you have lied and have been
caught
out
again.
"In the mid-2020 survey, we asked respondents if they hoped
Trump
would win or lose in the November election. This time, 11% said
they
hoped he would win (after weighting for gender due to the sample
having a male bias of 61.2%)."
I was commenting on a Radio New Zealand article based on the
survey -
11% is quite close to 10% and between 10% and 20%.
It appears you are incapable of reading evidence presented to
you
-
you pretend to be honest, when clearly you are not.
You only belatedly provided evidence after you were asked several
times.
Nevertheless, the evidence exists ipso facto, and now you have it.
Post by Tony
What you have provided has no basis in fact it is merely a poll
and
therefore of no
value.
Another "fact" of yours without a shred of supporting evidence. You
do
rather
a lot of it, don't you?
Fact is, the evidence contains finer and broader detail within the
context
of
New Zealand's political demographic, this being of value to
psephologists,
political analysts, economists, finance and the media et al. This
is,
indisputably, the **fact** of the matter under discussion, a
**fact**
that
could not exist in the absence of such poll-sampling. As such,
then,
the
poll
has value in its own right.
Know further that denying plain fact in face of reason is the
pathology
of
vexatious fools lost for argument yet who must always have the last
word,
however self-negating they know it only can be - "Trumpism" in all
its
unedifying bonehead obduracy and narcissism.
You are the sociopath and narcissist, not me. And you prove it every
time
you
stumble around your overworked keyboard.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
There is no relationship to the National party, a relationship
you
suggested.
That is a statement of fact but without a shred of supporting
evidence
or
proof.
None needed, it is up to the accuser to prove his point and he has
failed
to
do
so, and there you *really* do have it. Another Rich (in every way)
failure
and
deliberate attempt to use innuendo about a party he barely
understands.
Clearly you have failed to read (or perhaps comprehend) the url
"National is the preferred party
Very few Kiwi Trumpers identified with arch-populist Winston Peters,
however. Only 4.9% of them said he is the party leader they felt
closest to, perhaps because of his coalition with Labour after the
2017 election. They were more attached to National’s Judith Collins
(46.6%) and ACT Party leader David Seymour (30.2%).
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Only 20% of National supporters overall said they hoped Trump would
win. But this sub-group of National supporters made up 56% of the
entire cohort of Kiwi Trumpers. A further 23% of Kiwi Trumpers
supported ACT. So, the National Party is the preferred party of the
Kiwi Trumper."
That was not in the article. Are you drunk?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of others, you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
No Rich. As usual YOU are the liar!
Tony
2020-11-16 19:19:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed for brevity only.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the
National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of
others,
you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
Then explain this. Why did you mention Trump supporters and members of the
National party in the same sentence, there is only one possible reason. I have
not lied at all, and in fact never have in this newsgroup and you cannot
provide any evidence to the contrary.
You deliberately and obsessively drew a relationship between Trump supporters
and National party supporters.
Here you are, read what you wrote, provided verbatim and not out of context.

"That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand."

As I said you are a disgrace. You cannot denbate honestly and have to use lies
and innuendo. Note your use of the words may "may be" and vague references to
some news item that you have yet to provide an excerpt from.
No sir I am not a liar, you most certainly are a consumate one.
James Christophers
2020-11-16 20:18:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed for brevity only.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the
National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of
others,
you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
Then explain this. Why did you mention Trump supporters and members of the
National party in the same sentence, there is only one possible reason. I have
not lied at all, and in fact never have in this newsgroup and you cannot
provide any evidence to the contrary.
You deliberately and obsessively drew a relationship between Trump supporters
and National party supporters.
Here you are, read what you wrote, provided verbatim and not out of context.
"That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand."
As I said you are a disgrace. You cannot denbate honestly and have to use lies
and innuendo. Note your use of the words may "may be" and vague references to
some news item that you have yet to provide an excerpt from.
Speculative musings are very much part and parcel of informal discourse, for informal discourse is what you are both involved in, never debate characteristic of its intended meaning. The chaotic progress of this thread is a typical instance in which you are both in your own ways behaving vexatiously - Rich the capricious baiter with his mix of fact and invention, you his willing plodding captive. Rich will never desist from leading you by the nose, while you can never resist his siren call to have him yank your chain as and when he may idly choose.

Many months ago, Crash took the trouble to kindly advise you how better to go about addressing a topic by using hard **facts** on which to base your argument, rather than endless captiousness and confrontation that serves only further to undermine whatever substantive thinking you may be capable of.
Tony
2020-11-17 00:56:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed for brevity only.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the
National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of
others,
you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose
captiousness
and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal
and I
was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
Then explain this. Why did you mention Trump supporters and members of the
National party in the same sentence, there is only one possible reason. I have
not lied at all, and in fact never have in this newsgroup and you cannot
provide any evidence to the contrary.
You deliberately and obsessively drew a relationship between Trump supporters
and National party supporters.
Here you are, read what you wrote, provided verbatim and not out of context.
"That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand."
As I said you are a disgrace. You cannot denbate honestly and have to use lies
and innuendo. Note your use of the words may "may be" and vague references to
some news item that you have yet to provide an excerpt from.
Speculative musings are very much part and parcel of informal discourse, for
informal discourse is what you are both involved in, never debate
characteristic of its intended meaning. The chaotic progress of this thread is
a typical instance in which you are both in your own ways behaving vexatiously
- Rich the capricious baiter with his mix of fact and invention, you his
willing plodding captive. Rich will never desist from leading you by the nose,
while you can never resist his siren call to have him yank your chain as and
when he may idly choose.
Many months ago, Crash took the trouble to kindly advise you how better to go
about addressing a topic by using hard **facts** on which to base your
argument, rather than endless captiousness and confrontation that serves only
further to undermine whatever substantive thinking you may be capable of.
When others do not use hard facts but use lies I shall continue to call them
out as I determine the level of interest I have.
Meanwhile you are no better.
Rich80105
2020-11-16 21:42:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:19:40 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed for brevity only.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the
National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of
others,
you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose captiousness and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and I was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
Then explain this. Why did you mention Trump supporters and members of the
National party in the same sentence, there is only one possible reason. I have
not lied at all, and in fact never have in this newsgroup and you cannot
provide any evidence to the contrary.
You deliberately and obsessively drew a relationship between Trump supporters
and National party supporters.
Here you are, read what you wrote, provided verbatim and not out of context.
"That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand."
The clue is in the above quoe, Tony : "there was a news item
recently" - which I think I later clarified was on Radio New Zealand.
I was not able to find that item on the RNZ site later, but was able
to find the original item. I made no secret of my words being a
quotation from memory - the original article made it clear that I was
not misquoting that article in any substantive way.

The statement was not an assertion as to my unsupported opinion, it
was reporting the results of a survey reported on Radio New Zealand.

So no lie from me. If you dislike the conclusions take them up with
the authors of:
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
My posts are not directed at you personally, Tony, but your deliberate
misrepresentation, which, when repeated, amounts to deliberate lying,
is irksome, and akin to the deliberate use of falsehoods by Trump.
Post by Tony
As I said you are a disgrace. You cannot denbate honestly and have to use lies
and innuendo. Note your use of the words may "may be" and vague references to
some news item that you have yet to provide an excerpt from.
No sir I am not a liar, you most certainly are a consumate one.
Tony
2020-11-17 01:00:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:19:40 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed for brevity only.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the
National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of
others,
you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose
captiousness
and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and
I
was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
Then explain this. Why did you mention Trump supporters and members of the
National party in the same sentence, there is only one possible reason. I have
not lied at all, and in fact never have in this newsgroup and you cannot
provide any evidence to the contrary.
You deliberately and obsessively drew a relationship between Trump supporters
and National party supporters.
Here you are, read what you wrote, provided verbatim and not out of context.
"That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand."
The clue is in the above quoe, Tony : "there was a news item
recently" - which I think I later clarified was on Radio New Zealand.
I was not able to find that item on the RNZ site later, but was able
to find the original item. I made no secret of my words being a
quotation from memory - the original article made it clear that I was
not misquoting that article in any substantive way.
Yes you did and deliberately.
Post by Rich80105
The statement was not an assertion as to my unsupported opinion, it
was reporting the results of a survey reported on Radio New Zealand.
The survey has nothing to do with my point therefore irrelevant.
Post by Rich80105
So no lie from me. If you dislike the conclusions take them up with
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
My posts are not directed at you personally, Tony, but your deliberate
misrepresentation, which, when repeated, amounts to deliberate lying,
is irksome, and akin to the deliberate use of falsehoods by Trump.
You are infinitely more like Trump than me. And you deliberately tied two
separate matters together to make a childish and incorrect political point -
shame on you, you are still a disgrace.
I have provided only fair commentarey and made fair requests, you have lied and
behaved like the amateur political animal that you have proven to be for a
decade or more.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
As I said you are a disgrace. You cannot denbate honestly and have to use lies
and innuendo. Note your use of the words may "may be" and vague references to
some news item that you have yet to provide an excerpt from.
No sir I am not a liar, you most certainly are a consumate one.
Tony
2020-11-17 02:08:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:19:40 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Removed for brevity only.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
Since you had just responded to the same excerpt from that article,
you clearly knew which article I was referring to.
Which does not support your deliberate attempt to associate the
National
party
to Trump, an appalling thing to do. Time you backed New Zealand and not
Marxists.
I have not attempted to link the National Party to Trump - the article
I referred to links some National _supporters_ (not the party itself)
to personal support for Trump. Yet again you have misrepresented both
my comments and the article to which I referred. Shame on you!
No shame on you once more.
No shame on Rich, you say? What a difference a comma or perhaps even a
semi-colon makes!
Post by Tony
Of course your intent was clear to all of us.
Presuming to speak for others on the basis of your own prejudices and
preconceptions is presumptuous arrogance writ large. Prefacing it with a
patronising 'of course' only reinforces the inherent lie. Worse still, by
combining such degenerate behaviour with your childish traducing of
others,
you
identify yourself as an intellectually dishonest fraud whose
captiousness
and
ingrained compulsions have the better of his inborn binary tendencies.
You are capable of better. Much better.
I doubt that you are however.
I used the "of course" deliberately because Rich uses it a great deal and
I
was
making a point. Perhaps you could achieve some balance by acknowledging that,
but I doubt it.
Anyway there was no lie from me. Only Rich lied here and what a wopper.
The rest of your post is nonsense and the continuation of your childish attacks.
Now you are again being deliberately obnoxious. I have supporeted my
statements with facts; you have consistently and deliberately
misrepresented what I said, and have not been able to show any untruth
in what I have said. You are a Trumpist idiot - bringing the same
conempt for facts and the same disregard for honesty to your posts
that Trump brings to everything he does. Your self-delusion is evident
in your posts; you deserve the contempt of everyone.
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and the
National party.
No I did not - you lie, then lie again when corrected, then lie again.
It is you that can be compared with Trump in this thread!
Post by Tony
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from under that
deliberate ionnuendo.
You lie again.
Post by Tony
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are bleating
like a stuck pig.
You are a liar, Tony.
Then explain this. Why did you mention Trump supporters and members of the
National party in the same sentence, there is only one possible reason. I have
not lied at all, and in fact never have in this newsgroup and you cannot
provide any evidence to the contrary.
You deliberately and obsessively drew a relationship between Trump supporters
and National party supporters.
Here you are, read what you wrote, provided verbatim and not out of context.
"That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand."
The clue is in the above quoe, Tony : "there was a news item
recently" - which I think I later clarified was on Radio New Zealand.
I was not able to find that item on the RNZ site later, but was able
to find the original item. I made no secret of my words being a
quotation from memory - the original article made it clear that I was
not misquoting that article in any substantive way.
The statement was not an assertion as to my unsupported opinion, it
was reporting the results of a survey reported on Radio New Zealand.
So no lie from me. If you dislike the conclusions take them up with
https://theconversation.com/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-in-new-zealand-and-what-do-we-know-about-them-149424
My posts are not directed at you personally, Tony, but your deliberate
misrepresentation, which, when repeated, amounts to deliberate lying,
is irksome, and akin to the deliberate use of falsehoods by Trump.
I note that you did not answer my question - therein is an admission of guilt.
You do not have the grace to admit your childish attempts to discredit New
Zealand supporters of any political party that you do not also support. You do
it all of the time and with nasty innuendo, there is no honesty in you.
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
As I said you are a disgrace. You cannot denbate honestly and have to use lies
and innuendo. Note your use of the words may "may be" and vague references to
some news item that you have yet to provide an excerpt from.
No sir I am not a liar, you most certainly are a consumate one.
George
2020-11-16 19:02:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 23:34:20 -0600
Post by Tony
Really?
You are the one that deliberately drew a comparison between Trump and
the National party.
Everything you have posted since is an attempt to crawl out from
under that deliberate ionnuendo.
You stepped over the line as you have done so often and now you are
bleating like a stuck pig.
Just cut most of the BS so your message can be seen free of the clutter
from the wordy one.
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Tony
2020-11-14 04:30:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
On Tuesday, November 10, 2020 at 5:14:57 PM UTC+13, Rich80105
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon
dot
net
Post by Tony
Nilly)
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street
signs
show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display
lots
of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload
their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article.
Next
time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap
trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake
news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at
all.
I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he
example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took
quite a
while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in
some
cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was
important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very
quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries,
and
I
see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists
will
see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to
imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're
definitely
just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you
disagree
with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a
number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news
item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to
support
such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of
value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say.
In which case know that political polling provides a sampled overview of the
swings in public sentiment during the run-up to an election. These same polls
are assiduously tracked and analysed by local and international finance because
they know sentiment has as much to do with the way economies behave as
does
any
other factor. For verification, look only to the behaviour of stock markets
where killings are to be made by the mere whiff of a trend in sentiment
one
way
or the other, this behaviour being even more pronounced when competing policies
are significantly diverse and opposed. The sentiment in this instance is
twofold: greed and fear.
Anyone who uses polls as a basis for making important decisions is at best a
gambler and at worst stupid.
Categorically unequivocal, one notes, but conveying not one iota of substance
or learning in your foolish and precipitate absolutism. You do rather a lot of
it too, don't you?
Then know that political polls are only one of the myriad factors in making
decisions, political, financial and otherwise; "basis" being the sum total of
these - i.e. the foundation - on which any such judgements and decisions are
made.
Polls are of no actual value, something that you should know but refuse to
address with any intelligent argument.
As I have shown, the evidence is irrefutably otherwise, and you know it. All
you have left to you you is your obduracy in the face of fact-borne evidence -
childish foot-stamping of the intellectually stunted whose only recourse when
on the back foot is to try to browbeat and dominate the discourse. And you do
a lot of it, too, don't you?
You have shown nothing of value, as usual.
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
You really are very silly.
You clearly suggested that there is a link between liking Trump and the
National party, you have totally failed to make that connection. Just another
nasty bit of silliness.
And polls are not evidence, not worth any attention other than by
people
like
you.
There is no worthwhile suggestion that Trump is liked here other than by
a
tiny
minority (maybe marxists or other autocratic minorities?).
Without doubt, Trump appeals first and foremost to the unyielding and
tone-deaf authoritarian turn of mind, whoever, whatever and wherever it may be
and no matter what the underlying ideology. Birds of a feather...
(Note appropriate use of the ellipsis.)
Not an appropriate use at all - just scotch mist and vapours.
Wrong again. Fact is, it's 100% appropriate, as are your last five words
which, ironically, together characterise your infantile recalcitrance in the
face of reasoned discourse. You are not a debater in any rational sense of the
term; you are wholly and solely an inveterate stousher of the Trumpian stripe
and you cannot show otherwise. Period.
Keith Warren, first to be abusive as usual. Just reverse snobbery of course.
John Bowes
2020-11-11 05:15:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
Your not just stupid Rich! You're FUCKING stupid! Of course there were New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win! Not ever Kiwi is a virtue signaling halfwit like you and the government!
Rich80105
2020-11-11 21:15:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 21:15:39 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
Your not just stupid Rich! You're FUCKING stupid! Of course there were New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win! Not ever Kiwi is a virtue signaling halfwit like you and the government!
It is now looking fairly certain that Trump has not been re-elected,
John - were you among those who believed that Trump would have been
better for the USA than Biden?
John Bowes
2020-11-12 05:09:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 21:15:39 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
Your not just stupid Rich! You're FUCKING stupid! Of course there were New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win! Not ever Kiwi is a virtue signaling halfwit like you and the government!
It is now looking fairly certain that Trump has not been re-elected,
John - were you among those who believed that Trump would have been
better for the USA than Biden?
Better than the milk sop Biden Rich. The world needs people who'll stand up to the tyranny of China, Russia, North Korea and others in the axis of evil. Not virtue signalling fools like you and your ilk!
Rich80105
2020-11-12 09:24:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:09:33 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 21:15:39 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 20:48:48 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
Back on track - "no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie."
Do you deny that there are New Zealanders who were hoping that Trump
would be re-elected? A poll identified that there were quite a number
of them, and that they supported his record in Office.
Your not just stupid Rich! You're FUCKING stupid! Of course there were New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win! Not ever Kiwi is a virtue signaling halfwit like you and the government!
It is now looking fairly certain that Trump has not been re-elected,
John - were you among those who believed that Trump would have been
better for the USA than Biden?
Better than the milk sop Biden Rich. The world needs people who'll stand up to the tyranny of China, Russia, North Korea and others in the axis of evil. Not virtue signalling fools like you and your ilk!
Good on you for being clear about your views, John. As you might have
guessed I don't agree with you, but that is irrelevant. From one
perspective yu probably makemore than 10% of the posts to nz.general -
I suspect posters to nz.general may not be reresentative of the NZ
population, but if they were, it iwould certainly be reasonable to
expect at least 10% of the populatin to share your views of Donald
Trump. Thanks for your support.
Gordon
2020-11-13 07:00:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 21:09:33 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Better than the milk sop Biden Rich. The world needs people who'll stand up to the tyranny of China, Russia, North Korea and others in the axis of evil. Not virtue signalling fools like you and your ilk!
Good on you for being clear about your views, John. As you might have
guessed I don't agree with you, but that is irrelevant. From one
perspective yu probably makemore than 10% of the posts to nz.general -
I suspect posters to nz.general may not be reresentative of the NZ
population, but if they were, it iwould certainly be reasonable to
expect at least 10% of the populatin to share your views of Donald
Trump. Thanks for your support.
Overall Donald Trump has not made a fair hash of being President.
Nevertheless no one person is right all of the time. Even people one does
not agree with have a point or two that you do agree with.

Now we are way off the thread topic.
James Christophers
2020-11-11 22:45:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 13:49:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles
seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just
another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had? That is not to say that there are a number
of New Zealanders that do not share his views - there was a news item
recently that identified that there may be as many as 10% to 20% of
New Zealanders who wanted Trump to win; the majority of them
supporting the National Party in New Zealand
Whether you're right or wrong, what matters is that in all his appalling ignorance and paranoia, Trump is the very personification of unheeding tone-deaf autocracy and authoritarianism in their most crude and wilful manifestations. He appeals to those with an authoritarian streak but who have neither the stomach nor the opportunity to behave and do likewise. New Zealand has its fair quota of 'em too, all of 'em state-supported moral degenerates and cowards to a man.
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
What a stupid thing to write, no-one can provide any evidence to support such
an idiotic lie.
So you don't believe in the results of polls . . . .
WHat are you on?
Polls have nothing to do with this thread and in fact are so rarely of value
that only fools take them seriously.
So you say. Nevertheless, polls inevitably reinforce perceptions of winners and losers. That said, when it comes to single-issue leadership, Ardern has been admired - even praised - as a winner both here and abroad. Determined and resolved, she has conformed to the ideal that a political leader shall satisfy the paramount requirement first and foremost to protect the state and the people. She has accomplished this through the collegial process rather than the dictatorial, supported by the best advice to be had. It's no surprise, then, that in terms of New Zealand's public perceptions of her leadership, she's a winner - and then some - and all of it without a hint of autocratic or authoritarian behaviour on her part. At the same time, she has also enhanced New Zealand's standing in the world - and no one can say otherwise. Meanwhile, birds of a feather flock together as wrecker Trump tries to dismantle his own nation's democratic institutions while sucking up to just about every corrupt dictator who will indulge him.

Meanwhile, we have yet to see whether or not Ardern and her administration are capable of protecting the state and the people from the long-term economic and social consequences of the measures taken to combat Covid-19. She has her work cut out, the only cold comfort being that virtually every other country is in much the same boat with most of them even lower in the economic waters than we are.
John Bowes
2020-11-10 20:04:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 21:37:56 -0800 (PST), John Bowes
Post by John Bowes
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
When did Trump move to New Zealand moron? Hell when it comes to imbeciles seeing what they want to you hold the crown Rich and you're definitely just another jackbooted nazi tramping rough shod over those you disagree with!
Trump has not moved to New Zealand, John Bowes - what on earth gave
you the idea that he had?
<further stupidity from the imbecile snipped>

You did you stupid little boy :)
Gordon
2020-11-10 07:08:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020 19:26:15 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Nobody mentioned people overseas.
Oh well. That is that then.
James Christophers
2020-11-13 01:38:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
Tony
2020-11-13 02:59:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 03:30:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."

Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
Tony
2020-11-13 04:29:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence. Another lie
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 07:55:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:29:18 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence.
I gave the source - an item on Radio NZ. You have no evidence that it
is wrong.
Post by Tony
Another lie
And another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
Post by Tony
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Another unsupported opinion from you Tony.

And dual language street signs are not racist.
Tony
2020-11-13 19:25:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:29:18 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence.
I gave the source - an item on Radio NZ. You have no evidence that it
is wrong.
You have not provided a link or any support for that "opinion".
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Another lie
And another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
Post by Tony
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
And dual language street signs are not racist.
I didn't say they were but you seem to be obsessed by the idea.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 21:05:51 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:25:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:29:18 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence.
I gave the source - an item on Radio NZ. You have no evidence that it
is wrong.
You have not provided a link or any support for that "opinion".
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Another lie
And another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
Post by Tony
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
And dual language street signs are not racist.
I didn't say they were but you seem to be obsessed by the idea.
It is the Subject of the thread - perhaps you are avoiding the
subject.
Tony
2020-11-13 21:57:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:25:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:29:18 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of
augmented
road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence.
I gave the source - an item on Radio NZ. You have no evidence that it
is wrong.
You have not provided a link or any support for that "opinion".
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Another lie
And another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
Post by Tony
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
And dual language street signs are not racist.
I didn't say they were but you seem to be obsessed by the idea.
It is the Subject of the thread - perhaps you are avoiding the
subject.
I still didn't say they were racist, I was addressing your idiocy. You are the
one that is obsessed with signs.
Rich80105
2020-11-13 22:29:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:57:22 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:25:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:29:18 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of
augmented
road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence.
I gave the source - an item on Radio NZ. You have no evidence that it
is wrong.
You have not provided a link or any support for that "opinion".
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Another lie
And another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
Post by Tony
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
And dual language street signs are not racist.
I didn't say they were but you seem to be obsessed by the idea.
It is the Subject of the thread - perhaps you are avoiding the
subject.
I still didn't say they were racist, I was addressing your idiocy. You are the
one that is obsessed with signs.
Nobody said you had, but you are participating in a thread with that
as its Subject' I do accept that you were not the original poster -
that was Willy Nilly.
Tony
2020-11-14 04:28:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 15:57:22 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:25:58 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 22:29:18 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 20:59:39 -0600, Tony <lizandtony at orcon dot net
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show
"a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their
brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time
2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth
commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist
type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signs, but the example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of
augmented
road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it. His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
The initial post by Willy Nilly said: "A moronic article on RNZ says
that English-only street signs show "a touch of racism". They want our
street signs to display lots of languages so that drivers can get
confused and overload their brains and get into crashes."
Trump-like fake news? Certainly there are some in New Zealand, and
at least one that posts to nz.general, that would have liked Trump to
be re-elected, and we can be sure that he is not alone, but yu Tony
are the first to have claimed that they are commonplace . . . -
more fake news from you Tony?
No you did that. You suggested that there are 10% with no evidence.
I gave the source - an item on Radio NZ. You have no evidence that it
is wrong.
You have not provided a link or any support for that "opinion".
Post by Rich80105
Post by Tony
Another lie
And another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
Post by Tony
from you Rich.
Good grief you are stupid.
Another unsupported opinion from you Tony.
And dual language street signs are not racist.
I didn't say they were but you seem to be obsessed by the idea.
It is the Subject of the thread - perhaps you are avoiding the
subject.
I still didn't say they were racist, I was addressing your idiocy. You are the
one that is obsessed with signs.
Nobody said you had, but you are participating in a thread with that
as its Subject' I do accept that you were not the original poster -
that was Willy Nilly.
Why do you keep insisting that dual road signs are not racist if you are not
passionate about it whilst nobody is actually disagreeing with you? Or are you
bored today?
James Christophers
2020-11-13 22:09:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it.
I addressed Rich's reference to bilingual road signs in Wales. That is all.
Post by Tony
His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
Which add-on throw-away teaser I have specifically **not** addressed since in my view it can add nothing of value to the discourse.

To my mind, the original road signage issue is at least as much about institutional race-based **exceptionalism** than it is about racism per se which itself has, in my opinion, been used as a smokescreen to advance the maori language agenda but, as ever, at your and my expense.

Again, perhaps if you are so minded, you could start a fresh thread dealing with existing racially-based exceptionalisms in local and international affairs, examining the influence of such exceptionalisms on global politics and societies. Rich pickings.
Tony
2020-11-14 04:26:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
A moronic article on RNZ says that English-only street signs show "a
touch of racism". They want our street signs to display lots of
languages so that drivers can get confused and overload their brains
and get into crashes.
The word "safety" was mentioned 3 times in the article. Next time 2,
then 1, then ...
Clearly it was sufficiently moronic that you felt it worth commenting
on, but not to give a link - perhaps it was just cheap trumpist type
cheap journalism feeding the far right base with fake news?
You're getting weirder, Rich, how do you do it?
Post by Rich80105
Post by Willy Nilly
Post by Willy Nilly
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/430237/a-touch-of-racism-calls-for-bilingual-traffic-signs
Thansk for the link. Turns out not to have been moronic at all. I
understand the need for clarity of traffic signes, but he example
given of an entry sign seemed quite reasonable. It took quite a while
for the dual English / Welsh signs to gain acceptance - in some cases
it was necessary for signs to be re-designed where it was important
that drivers not be distracted and receive information very quickly,
but dual language signs are quite common n other countries, and I see
no problem with them here. Perhaps the far-right Trumpists will see
what the want to see, regardless of reality?
Why would overseas far right people care about our signs?
Who has suggested they do? Rich simply gives a valid example of augmented road
signage overseas, and possible ensuing issues. That is all
No that is not all. And you know it.
I addressed Rich's reference to bilingual road signs in Wales. That is all.
So?
Post by James Christophers
Post by Tony
His innuendo suggested that Trump like
people are commonplace here - no evidence provided of course.
Which add-on throw-away teaser I have specifically **not** addressed since in
my view it can add nothing of value to the discourse.
So?
Post by James Christophers
To my mind, the original road signage issue is at least as much about
institutional race-based **exceptionalism** than it is about racism per se
which itself has, in my opinion, been used as a smokescreen to advance the
maori language agenda but, as ever, at your and my expense.
Again, perhaps if you are so minded, you could start a fresh thread dealing
with existing racially-based exceptionalisms in local and international
affairs, examining the influence of such exceptionalisms on global politics and
societies. Rich pickings.
Why?
All ho hum additions to a silly thread.
Loading...